Skip to main content

Full text of "John Wallis, A Defense of the Christian Sabbath; In answer to a Treatise of Mr. Thomas Bampfield pleading for Saturday-Sabbath, Part II (1694)"

See other formats


Imprimatur, 



HEN. <^LVRICH, 
Vice-Can. Ox on. 

1694. C 



DEFENSE 

OF THE 

Cbriftian Sabbath \ 

— *-♦'■*. ^.J 1 T \ I 1 4 1 * 7l ^ >\ \ \ Ti% 



PART the SECOND. 

being' (97i 
A Rejoihder to Mr. Eampfield^ R EPLr 

TO 

I Do&ot ELLIS'S Discourse 
Coocerning The 

CHRISTIAN-SABBATH. 



by 

°™ WALLIS, D.D. AndProfeffor of 
in the Unirerfity of OXFORD. 



OXFORD, 
J^St. WsChu rch-Yard, LONDON. 1694 



[I] 




ADVERTISEMENT, 

THE Firft Edition, of the Firft Part, be- 
ing Difperfed, and Scarce to be had; 
Care was taken to Re-print it, in the Second 
Edition, (with very little Alteration) Page for 
Page, fo as not to Diforder the Citations. 



! i. 



I S C O U R S E 

Concerning The 

Chriftian Sabbath. 

PART the SECOND. 

BEING 

j§ Rejoinder to Mr, BampfieldV Reply. 

WHEN I anfwered your former Book, which 
you call An Enquiry ^ &c. I did not know who 
was the Author of it, (or that you had enter* 
tallied that Opinion, ) and therefore could not 
pay you thofe Refpeas that otherwife I fliould have done. For 
though I had made Enquiry as I had opportunity at Oxford, of 
fflany there, (and particularly fome of your good f Hcnds,and Noil- 
Conformifts, whom I thought moft likely to know,) they all a- 
greed that n was not Mn Bampfield the Counfellor at Law, but 
fome relation of yours. Nor was I rectified therein, till (a great 
while after my book was abroad ) when I was informed by ano- 
ther good friendof yours (Mr. T.E) that it was your Book. And 
lam not forry (for lome reafons) that I did not know it fooner. 

However; it was not the Man, but the Doctrine, that I was 
to anfwer : And if, in fo doing, I did not pay you thofe refpeib 
* would otherwife allow you ; yet I hope there is nothing in it 
Undecen t or Unbecoming a fair Difputant. 

You obferve ( Rep. p.i. ) thatl had faid { in my "Dijcourfe p. i.) 
Th.it ImuMngt (for my own part) give any 'Dijiurbancc (on 
■ A jucb 



f>2 The Chriftun SMtih. Part 1 1. 

' fuch account) to the "Peace andfroBke of the Church where I live, 
jo that a Sabbath he duly obferved, though perhaps wt upon what 
day I fhouldchwfe: Which 1 find doth give youiome diicurbance, 
and It will take up fome time to anfwer your Query's about it. 
I am of the fame opinion Ml. ForReafons I then gave, p, i,i,io, 
j i, I2 T 13,14, (To which you make no Reply.) Becaute I think 
the Subftantials of a Duty, are of greater moment, and more in- 
tended n\ the Commands of God, than ihtCircumftantials that do 
attend it ; and thefe upon occafion to give way to thofe. 

I gave you many precedents to this purpofe, p. 1 ,2,10,11,1 fcjCfa 
Cinumdfion was, by the Inftitution, to be performed on the 
Eighth day: but in cafe it were then omitted it might be done 
the next day, or fome time after, rather than not at all. Atr* 
bam was 99 years old, and Ifhmael i\ y and the other Males ia 
Abraham^ family of feveral ages when they were at once Cir^ 
cumcifed, Gen. 17.10,23, And Profelites were circumcifed at 
any Age. 

And Circumcifion, (you know) was omitted in the Wildernefs 
forfourty years together (as inconvenient by reafon of their un- 
certain travels) and thofe who were born during that time were 
at once Circumcifed at Gilgal, Jop.s^ h 5? 4? ?> And Ttototty 
was dotibtlefs more than eight days old, when Taul caufed him to 
be Circumcifed) becaufe his ^Mother was a Jew. A&* 16. 1 . And 
ill this notwithftanding your great Ob je&ion, No other day Com- 
manded, no Tromife to any other, nor Threatning for the omiflion. 

The Taffover was, by the Inftitution, to be kept on the fourteenth 
day of the fit ft month; but Hezsktah (when it could not conve- 
niently be done in the firft Month) kept it in the fecond month, 
inftead of the firft (after it had been a long time intermitted,) 
iChron. 30. a, 3. 

The Jews had their Feafts of the New- Moons ; but were at 
great uncertainties (as 1 there (hewed, p. 11, 11.) as to one, two, 
or three days \ and it was left much to the Triefts difcrction,\\hicb. 
of thofe days fliould be reputed the day of the New-mom, yet 
was not the Service to be negle&ed; but to be performed, if not 
on the juftday, at leafl on the reputed day of the New-moon. 
And nofcniple (that I know of) was madeupon it. Of which 
you may ccnfult, if you pleafe, Mr. Seldens Treatife De Ann* 
Chili Feterum Judtforum. The Jews, I prefume, have at this 
day {Calendars as other People have ; and that fome of thcif 
JaterRabbins, RiXQePtoJcmys time, have Tables of the Motions 
of the Sun and Moon borrowed from him ; But we are here 

A . fpeak- 



Part 1 1. The ChrifiUn Sdbatk 3 

tfpcakingof the tiroes of Mofes, and thence downward toChrift's 
Sme. And that they had then fuch Kaiendars, I do not know, 
»or do believe. They had no doubt at that time a Solar Year 
(how exaft, I know not, ) according to which they judged of the 
Equinox, and of their Summer and Winter and Secd-ume and 
Harveft : But their Feafts did depend on their Lunar Ycar 4 which 
was very uncertain ; fometimes of Twelve fometinw of Thirteen 
Months; and the beginnings of thefe Months very uncertain. 

And the fame uncertainty did afFefl the Tafl-over alfo : For if 
the day of the New-moon were uncertain, it muft be equally un- 
certain which fliould be the fourteenth day on which the Pafs- 
bver was to be kept. And we know Chrijl with his Difciples did 
fcat his lafl Pafsover on One day, and the Jews on Another; 
which could not both be on the fourteenth day from the true New 
Moon ; but were both fo reputed, one by him, the other by them % 
And 1 do not find it blamed in either. I tuppofe you will not blame 
Chrift and his Difciples. And I would not blame the other, be- 
caufe I find that Gods Providence fo ordered-it that on this day 
Chrift (the Antitype and true PafchalLamb) was Crucified ; not 
on the day when himfclf did eat the Pafs-over. 1 would rather 
conclude From both, that the nicety of a Day was not then 
J thought fo confiderable as to vitiate the Service- 

And this of the Day might fo happen as to make the Month 
uncertain alfo : For if the Full- Moon happened near the Equinox, it 
was much at the Prieftsdifcretion, whether it (hould be reputed 
the thirteenth Month of the year 9 aft, or the firft ^Month of the 
year Coming. To all which (and much more) you make no 
Reply at all. 

I And as to Circumftances, even in other Inftitutions, they may 
be part of the Narrative, when they arc no parts of the Inflitu- 
tion ; As, in the Inflitution of the Lords Supper, that it was in an 
Upper Room, and After Supper, &c. 

And, when in the firft Inftitution, fome Circumftantials were 
but Occafional ( as to that Time and Place ) they may ceafe to be 
Obligatory, when the cafe is altered: As, in the Pafs-over, that 
it was to be eatep /landings with their Loins Girt , and Staves in 
their Hands, as in haft to be gone; and mttoftir out of the Houfe 
till morning, Exod. 12. 11, zi. Notwithftanding which, Chrift 
vith his Difciples (at his laft Pafs-over) did eat it fitting or rather 
lyings and went the fame night to Mount Olivet, Mat.itf. ao, 10,16. 

For which confide rations, with others of like nature, I think 
the difference of a day in many cafes fo inconfiderable, in com- 

A 3. ; pa«- 



j i? , 

^L, t Research 



w 



1 



4 The Chrifiisn SMath. Part II. 

panfon with the Subftantials of a Duty, as that I would not on 
this account give difturbance, though not upon [the day that I 
fhould choofe. 

But IVhat day I would choofe, you fay, you know not. And you 
ftcm to Hope, Rep. p. 2. and Think* and>^ and would have 
it thought, that I would Choofe your feventh day Sabbath : and this 
after the beji judgment you can make of my book, (for which 
reafon I (hall lefs truft to your Judgment another time, ) and in- 
finite (broadly enough) p. 6i. as if I did but ejpouje a notion 
( again/I my own judgment ) by which I have a benefit , and, for 
fear to loofe or endanger that benefit ', do imploy my learning and in- 
geny to cavil at you, and the direff will ana word of God, and 
Teach the contrary ; notwithftanding my doubts and fcruples ; and 
p. 74- that I do it for fome worldly advantage : whereas you Hope 
and Think and Judge that (if left to my own choice) I am really 
of your mind. And you have the confidence Rep. p. 18. to de- 
fire that the 2)offor who krvery able would undertake your caufe : 
As if you thought me one of thofe who may be indifferently re- 
tained on either fide as there is occafion: ( but, however, to be re- 
tained on both fides is not fair to a&ice) With many hard cenfurcs 
all along. (I believe that ( till now ) you had a better opinion ot 
me- Have I loft all my reputation with you for not approving 
your Saturday-Sabbath?) I {hould not have expefted that Mr. 
Bampfield would have thus infinnated without any ground, and 
take it to be more uncharitable than all the hardlVords you com- 
plain of {p. 6%) from Mr. Trofs. { Which yet are moil of them 
your own.) I am fo charitable as to think Mr. Bampfield ( though 
in an Error ) doth argue according to his own judgment, not for 
worldly advantages contrary thereunto. 

But, to put you oi]t of 'Doubt (and anfwer your furnufe) I 
will tell you, (without hefitance, and without doubt orfcrupk.) 

I would choofe (if it were left to my choice) that Day which' 
1 think the Apoftles didobferve, and the Chriftian Churches in 
their time, (and everfince,) which (in contradiftin£tion to the 
Jewifti Sabbath) they called the Lords Z)ay; and the pit day of the 
week, or the firfi day after the (Jewilh) Sabbat b K And the middle 
pari of this day, being the chief time for A&ion or Bufinefs 
( fuppofe from Sun-rifine to Sun-fetting,) 1 fhould take to be the 
midale-part of fuch Sabbath-day; raking into it, fo much Back- 
ward (toward the Mid-night Iaft part) and fo much Forward (to^ 
ward the Mid-night enfumg) as is wont to be accounted time of 
hufinefs (or the diesprafficus y ) and thatfo much of the time (be* 

twttfi 



Part I L The Chriftm Sdhatk 5 

tween mid-night and mid-night) as is to be time of btifmej jfliould 
(on that day) be imployed in Religious bufinefs (as, on other days, 
lit is or may be imployed in Civil bufinefs^) and lb much 01 it 
(next after the mid-night paft, and next before the mid-night fol- 
lowing,) as is reafonably to be allowed for Natural Reft, (hould 
xm this day be a Relaxation from Religious bufinefs, as on other 
Jays from Civil bufinefs. This is the Day 1 would choofe ; and 
thus bounded. 

But if I were in New-Engknd r where (I am told) they life to 
begin their Sabbath on Saturday-night about Sun-fet: I would 
then and there comply with the pra&ice I there find, rather than 
jive them any Oflfenie or Difhirbance therein. For I do not think 
it the defign of the Fourth Commandment, to defcend to fuch 
(Pun&ilio s ; but rather that the Sabbath-day fhould be fo reckoned 
ljuid fo bounded, as other days are reputed to be. 
t: But I have fomewhat further to add to this purpofe, upon con- 
•fideration of the Scheme you give us, {Repl p^i^i^j.) for the 
accounting of Days. 

You pleafe to begin ox fet forth ( as you fay) ztjerufalem ;(And 
why fo, but becaufe/fltf pleafe? Another perhaps would choofe to 
'begin at the Firft Meridian^x elfewhere. But, be it as you pleafe.) 
'^lomjerufalem you begin your account on Saturday Mar.n. 
'and bring your account round the Earth to Jerusalem again. From 
•hence Weftward 15- degrees, will be Saturday ftill, but an hour 
•htcr than ztjerufalem ; and 1 5 degrees further, will be two hours 
later but ftill the fame day ; and fo onward, for every fifteen de- 
grees , allowing an hour. And accordingly at Rome ( you tell us) 
rat will be Saturday ftill, but two hours later than zxjerujdem. 
-At London, Saturday will be 3 hours and j i minutes later than at 
Jerufalem. At Dublin, about 3 hours and $1 minutes later than 
at Jcrufalem. And pafHng on to New-England, { though in fo 
palling you crofs the firft Meridian) it fhall yet be Saturday, but la- 
ter by eight hours than ztjerufalem. ( Whether thefe be the jufl 
'diftanccsof thofe Meridians, is not material; but we will take 
'them fo to be,) Thence palling onward to Japan, it will there be 
Saturday ftill (or thejeventhday) March ix but later by hoars 
j than at Jerufakm. And from Japan, You fay ( topafs over the other 
Meridians andrefi of the land in Afia) about f even hours. (That is, 
inCh:mJndia,Terfia,Baly^ 'tis ftill Saturday X&r. 1 J. 

but Liter and later, til] in 7 hours more we come from Japan to 
'brufalem again.) And, becauje i^andq are 24, when we come 
.jfengfr/oK again, we are then to call it Sunday March 12; but 



JDigitized bv the Cej 



:ist Research 



w 



6 Tk Cbrifiim Sabbstk Part 1 1, 

till we come there, it muft yet be Saturday March n, though 
perhaps 2.3 hours (or more than fo) later than M Jerufalem. And 
this, I think,you will not deny to be a juft account of your Scheme, 
according to your own mind, Jtep. p, though in fomewhat 
fewer words. 

And according to this Scheme, at Sinai, Jordan, and Mount 
Olivet \ (for we are not yetcojne to Jerufalem, all thefe places be- 
ing Eaftward from it,} it muft yet be Saturday March 1 1 . later by 
almoft hours than at Jerufalem. And particularly at Mount 
Sinai (wnich is, you tell us, 6 degrees Eaftward from Jerujklem y 
that is, £4 minutes of time) it mitft yet be Saturday, March 1 f, 
but later than at Jerufalemby 23 Errand 36 minutes. At Mount 
Olivet, it muft yet be Mar. 11. (for we arc yet Ihort of Jerufa- 
lem) but later by almoft 24 hours (wanting left, than one minute.) 
So that, if Chnlt did eat the Pafs^over, on Tburfday the Thir- 
teenth day of the firft month, and after went to Mount Olivet f it 
would there be but Wednesday the Twelfth day; and when he 
came back to jferufalem, it was there again Tburfday the Thir- 
teenth, audit he had returned back again to Mount OlivU the 
fame night, it would now again be but fFednefday the Twelfth. 

But you may remember that you told us before (^>*p*5 7/^8,69 ) 
that though the Sun travel IVefiward^ yet the Toftetity of Adam 
md Noah did travel (not only Weft ward, but) £aft, Jreft, North 
and South, overfpreadtng the Earth ; and whenever they came (Eaft- 
ward or Weftward ) after Six days of travel or other work, as the 
Sun did fet, their Sabbath was to begin. ( I will not trouble you with 
Greenland, where if they muft wait till Sun-fit } they muft have 
no Sabbath for divers Months together.) 

Now thofe who travel Eaftward from Jerufalem muft there- 
fore reckon the fame day, fifteen degrees Eaftward, to be m how 
fooner than at Jerufalem, and fo in proportion the further they 
go ; one hour for every fifteen degrees. And your felf give us a pre* 
cedent of fuch reckoning (p. 71.) at Sinai (feeing about fa de- 
grees of Longitude Eaftward from Jerufalem) the J 'evmth day at 
Sinai was about 14 Minutes fooner than At Jerufalem } yet was the 
Seventh day it both- 

Let us now begin where you left, that is, at Sunday Mar At* 
*6p§ at Jerufalem. This at Sinai will be Sunday (the fame day) 
but 14 minutes fooner than at Jerufalem, as you tell us, pqg. 71 ; 
But, according to your other account, pag. 73. it was to be Satur- 
day 13 hours and 36 minutes later than at Jerufalem, And whe- 
ther of the two reckonings mult we follow ? And at Jepm y 'twill 



art 1 1- Tk Chnjlian Sdbatk 7 

the fame day (Sunday) b|it earlier by *) hours than at Jerufa* 
h And at New-England, the fame day (Sunday) will be fatten 
ws fooner than at Jerufalem, And Sunday at Rome will be \\ 
tours fooner than at Jerufalem. And fo onward till you coineto 
Jerufalem again. But then (and not till then ) inftead of calling it 
Sunday tSMar. 12. 14 hours fooner than at Jetnfalem, we muft call 
it Saturday Man n. at Jerufalem: Which is a juft account, ac- 
cording to your own Scheme, as to thofe who travel Eaftward ; 
Ot fo reckon as if they did fo travel. 

h So that, at Japan, (according to your two accounts) it is in- 
different whether to call it Saturday labours later, according to 
MS- 11- ox Sunday 7 hours fooner than at Jerufalem, according to 
pag> And &tNew-Enghnei, 'tis indifferent whether to call it 
Saturday eight hours later , or Sunday \ 6 hours fooner , than at Je- 
tufalem: for 'tis jufl the fame time either way. 
r^But, notwithuanding this indifference, I would, as to New* 
England, comply with your Scheme fag, 73. and call it (as you 
io) Saturday eight hours later 7 (though in going thither we crofs 
die firft Meridian,) becaufe in New-England they do fb account 
tilth days. But, as to Japan, 1 would not comoly with you, to call 
it Saturday feventeen hours later , but would choofe to call it Sun* . 
iay *J even hours fooner than at jferufalem; becaufe, at Japan, they 
fc fo account their days. And therefore though I do acknowledge 
(as you fpeak Repl pa.) that the Word is the Rule of fForfoip; yet 
rwould here be guided by theTraHiee of the place^ (for the Word 
4fcth herein determined nothing either way) which pradhce there- 
fore I would not difturb. 

KAnd this doth furnifh a Third Expedient (befide the Two which 
ll gave you before) by travelling to Japan, For what you call Sa- 
turday for the Seventh day ) jtventeen hours later , will be the fame 
with what they call Sunday for the firft day y ) f even hours fooner 
ihto ujetufalem. That is, Your Saturday- fabbath, will he the 
fcme with their Sunday fabbatk Or if to ]apan be too great a 
Journey, 'twill be the lame cafe if you go but toCbina, Eajt-lndia, 
t*Jta, Babylon, or but to Syria , 'or any place Eaftward to Je- 
rufalem. 

\ 'But ( in erefting this Scheme, and fitting 00/ from Jerufalem^ 
leftward, reckoning Mar. 1 r. till we come round to Jerufalem 
*gain ) you do it, you fay, without jetting a Meridian ; I fuppofe, 
% Meridian, you mean without fetting a Firft Meridian j for 
Otherwife every place hath its Meridian;) But in thus reckoning 
jou do ( though you be not aware of it) make this 1 firft dtf^ 



he 



Digitized by the Ce 



titist Research 



'Mi 



ridiaH. 



8 Tk Omftafi Sdhatk Part II, 

ridian. For, a firft Meridian is that from whence we reckon 
1,2, j, &c till at 360 we come round thither again. For, fa 
reckoning, makes this { to you ) the firjl Meridian. Onely you 
reckon trom thence i, 2,3,&c. Wefiward: whereas others do 
to reckon from their Firit Meridian Eajiward^ But in pag. 71, 
you fo reckon Eajlward as others do. Both which make it a Jirjl 
xjMcridmn. 

I have but one thing more here to note and I ftiall difmifs this 
point. And it is your prudent choke of the EfumSiial day, 
when the days and nights be equal all the AVorhj over. For if 
you had pitched upon any other day than one of the two Eqm* 
hoxes, the Obliquity of Horizons (as you are well aware, Jtep.^o\ 
would (mite have fpoikd your reckoning/ For though, to all 
imder the fame Meridian, it be Mid-day at the fame time, and 
Mid-night likewife; yet fun-rtfing, and junfetiing he at very 
different times, even to thoie under the fame Meridian, And ao 
cordingly the Sabbath not to begin, at all times of the year, at 
Home, London, New-England y &c. fo long before or after that at 
Jerufalem,z$ your fcheme appoints. But I lhall prefs this no farther. 

But thus much is undeniably evident from your own Scheme, 
, that, at Japan for inlUnce, *r Mount Sinai } the fatfte day may in- 
differently be called fatnrday otfunday, according as from jrVr/^i 
lem you reckon fVcfiward or Eajiward. Which is enough for the 
pwpofe to which I allege it. 

From what hath been faid, I think it is very plain. That fince, 
according to your own Scheme. ( any where but ztjferttfalem^ the 
fam$ day may be indifferently called Sunday or Saturday (the jirjl 
or the jeventh day) according as to that place we reckon fromjf- 
rufakm Ealhvard or Weftward : I am iHll of opinion that we 
ftiould not quarel upon a circumftance which doth not influence 
(as you call it Enq. fag. 27.) tk lively, fiery, morning and evening 
(Vord and Prayer ; tor men may be as dead and formal on a Satur- 
day as on a Sunday. » : J 

You next fall upon me (Rep. p. 2) to know what Church it is 1 
would notdiilurb; for w live in an age (you tell us) wherein an 
variety of Churches. Now this I take to be a captious Qucftiofl. 
Would you have me here enter* on a Difpute of Whigg and 
Tory ; of Conformifi and Nothconformijii Epifiopal, Presbyter i0. 
Independent, rftabaptiji y Jews ^Quakers? (Pray which Church 
or Churches of all thefe is it that you have a fpight a^ in contra- 
diftiufHon to the Churches of Chrtfi y who's true peace, yoy fiy,^ 
uwldnot difiurb f) No I flull not be lead afidc from the point in 



1 Digitized by the C 



frai t II. The ChriJHtw Sahbatb; 0 

Kandtoanv of thefe difputes, which are nothing to the prefent N 
[purpofe. "By the Church whofe peace and praftice I would not 
ierein difturb. I mean the Generality of Chriftian people amonglt 
Whom I live. For ( without difputing what other varieties there 
Kay be araongft us) I think we are all agreed, except your fclf and 
feme few others ( not fo many, I hope, as to be called the Church,) 
|o celebrate the Lords-day, not the J ewijk Sabbath. 
1 1 would fay the like as to your other excurfions ( in which you 
Deem to take great pleafure) againfl Chriftmafs, Eafter, IVhttfunhde, , 
End other tides as you call them ) Holy -days, Rome, Purgatory, MaJ* 
, and Monkery, Formal Wotjkifi, Form of fFotfhip, the Lot fs Prayer 
WnTublick, Ceremonies Jradition, Black Garments, your thoughts, of 
Monarchy, Swearing to a point, objuring Endeavours and other t he 
like excurfions; with which I mean not to trouble my felf: Be- 
caufe, whatever there be of Good or Bad m any of thefe, it is no- 
thing to our prefent purpofe of a Saturday-fabbatb. You arc very 
touchy with me (Hep. p. 3 i t &) for but naming the phrafe of Hold- 
ing.fofth, though (I think) very innocently. (And fo, I ftppofc, 
Erffl thofe thin!-, that confnlt the place not as you Jttjl|^ 
tut as it is in my 'Dipurfc p. 1* ) This you call \Bl J^™} 
■Highly Blamable. ( Whether you take me for a Stofr or a Caff, I 
cann/t tell. } But. pray Sir, are the Words and Phrafe of ISon- 
Wormifts fo facred, that a man may not venture : to Name one pt 
, them, without a Reprimand ? While you take the liberty to be * 
frays Flurting at the Words,Pnrafes, and Praxes or others, when 
Htf nothing fothc Purpofe. It may prove perhaps tnatmfcw • 
facial Knac% at Finding Fault but proves nothing to thepmt m 
hand. You would not take it kindly of me if I mould upon all oc- 
Cahons (or without occafion) be ftill inveighing again! 
%ration,Non:conformity, zvAJudaizing 
picks) or charge you (by infinuation with worfitprng Satutn uf>»t 
12% as oftVyou do y us with worQuping the 
(But, tivmjfo the Sun upon Sunday, runs fo glib upon W»"B»fi 
ihat'vou muffneeds be at it again and again,eyen aher I had few d 
you plainly that there is no Foundation for *t ) N ow if it would 
' lot Lomi me (as I think it would not) to be ^ fi ^ » ' g 
along, at what is nothing to the purpofe ; pray 
- you ol I are molt blamable in this regard. And, if I have handled 
5011 therein more foftly than perhaps another C 
lone; you fiiouldnotfe me for it; K^^^Ls* 
Theft things T mention in the beginning, ^"g"^ 
throw off thelc Extravagances and impertinent Excurfions, and 

B 



IO The Chriftw Sdbtib. Part IT 

not bejroncemed to an fwer them where-ever I meet them. And 

tis the way lthiakfittoufc, as to what is nothingYo tie purpof 

,Sf ■ L ?i I* 1 **' y °"M ^ ^ frj «P'C0&»* « the 'DoBor's Book: 
and fo Mi 1 in yours, when they be nofhmg to our bufmefs 

But let us come to the bufmefs in hand : Wherein are Two Points 
U JH illh «l [ : Though yon pleafeto make them butOn 

Hrlt Whether we have fuftcient ground for celebrating the 
Lords-dajr, oxFnftDayofthe }Feek,% the weeks were then act 
counted by the Jews, or be now by us 

ftl« h H^ ft i? f / hef l-r t i ink was not at a11 qaeftioned in the Apo- 
Jties time but praflifcd generaDy by all Chriftians ■ For it £1™ 

Chrift, for ordering the afTairsof the Chrilkan Church, thev had 
of ZiiS ?; *? "WW** this, than againft the introducing 
o Bapufm, the Lord's Supper, the inftitutmn of Elders, Deacons 

td 0 ?hW\fo r l w f h r ver other offic i rs and 0rders ™ th ^te£ 

S;r 5 C l thlS We „ meet Wlth no dif PW«, but a fiknt 
but to difpute about Words. If you do not like that Name I 
fer- " ^ ** **y ^d. I take iuo T e a 

Name And T %S S r *"! ° f Ac J CWS > the y S ave » 
nay. V, nich 1 do not find fo called in Scripture. 

i 0 S,f tllcr ' ca f e w « ™<* the fame as that of Circum- 
ciiion, the Pals-over, and other Jewifli Feafis or Fefti vals he S 
nencefrom Meats, their Rites'of Purification, and S Lke with' 

were very fond and loth to part with them. And tho/e of them 
who thought themfelves obliged to be Baptized and clcumT^J 
f^d no doubt think thenffelves obliged, befide the ChSs 

^^iXf?*^ S ^" k This I Se to be 

i^n™* the l atter > the Apoftle advifeth a mutual Forbear- 

he bc«er fa3 f j? 1 rT* time and leifure tbe y 

Si *5 5 Cd l thCir Chn f , - an L j- bc "y : And did himfelf 
comply with them therein ; as things JofoaM. though not Oifr 

g'*g. 



Part ir. The Chrifun Salhath. 

mg. With the W, I mean ; to whom thefc had once Wn r , 
fet would not have them introduced on the GeSSL f **' 
Me) to whom they had not been Laws h,L^rV^Z 
pdiftmaion I do not find that you take anv ntW ufu J 

fc!. w !i 8 ] , !A ai t! , P on th, i afr-aon, *r. ra. , 0 ,Ti whe« 




^ey didnotthink&fe7t£el^;7d7 m 

Ween /Ae and /Ar ,^ S S 

tt5 5 "W^ ^ ^ ^ ^ « ft? 
jet e «// Z c Wff«j ? / // Je Law } And they are informed »f th,, th , 

^Wfthel^thataream^ 

fertheCuftomes, ver. 20, 27. Which wastrue zsiotheGenrt * 
35 J 0 the *:f*™>* #* Gentiles. For tak,ng off vh eh 

*P*nff htm elf w ith them; to fatisfy the Tews that Ik h JbTe* 
U^efented, andthat ^^(ajewj vMi^^tZ 
K «J x 3 * 4 But, *s touching the Gentiles which hef^e, w 
7 ? (f l y ^ ey, ^Tf^^^ohfervenofHchthi^ 

ald 'llH tbt ?(?™fr tb "i ^redtoWs, ^d 
t Moud and jromftrmgled and from fornication, ver. **/ But 
ung ot the Jcwf, Sabbath ( in contradiftinclion to the 
J Which I take to be particularly intended by the word 

TwoQueftions I fliall fpeak diffinflly ; and firfi, 
* fae fujfictent ground for Celebrating the Lord's2)*y 
fo this, your great Objection is, that there is no £W, Com 
™«, Rectrdedin Scripture, for lb doing.' 

C Anfw " t0 this 1 ftcw,d fo%&KaEx?repCommamlllecvr*W 
gneceflary for our Warrant: And then, that there is other- 
"je m the Word of God fufhcient to warrant us therein 
in order fo thefirft, I gave you divers Inftances <mc. p.i<S,i- ) 
>ftich I do not remember that you give any Anfwer. Goi wa, 
junped by Smrtfea very early ; at jeaft as early as that of Cain 
"Abe/; And though (I luppok) you think they had fome Corn- 
ea Jor it, yet we have no fuch Command Recorded, antecedent 
r e«nto. The hke of Jacob's confecrating a Tittar, by pourin* 
npon it, without any antecedent Command Recorded for confe- 
•ng either Things orPerfons by Anointing, or pouring on of Of I. 

B 2 There 



The CbrifiiR Sdbitb. Part II. 

There was (I preftime) a Command (or fomewhat equivalent there, 
Jnto) that 1 Fire forlncenfe mould be taken from tht - Altar { elf 
Nadab and ^ite would not have been deftroyed for rfffftX 
fire.) But I do not find fuch Command Recorded. (With 

other the like Inftances, which 1 forbear to repeat) To winch Id 
ranowaddthediftinaionof^ 

'and by God approved, {as appears by his fending Thofe by Seven* 
and Thefe by TWj, and we have reafon to think it was by bj 
oder Yet is no antecedent C^W to^for fnch difhnaioj 
that I find. And accordingly I do .not f doubt but .that Apoffl* 
had fufficient authority and direction from Chnft ( wjo ^ ^ 
Commandments, of things pertaining to the hngdome of G d kd.i 
i for what they fetled in the Chnftian Church, though thj 
mrti cular Commands be not Recorded. I do not find any partictM 
Commands from Chnft for their appointing xtejeven kM 
for their ordaining Elders in every Church A& H- ft* for gv| 
the like in charge, to M to ordain and P' - ^ 

Asf/«, 1 rW * and the like to Titus m Crete to ordam ElM 
iitvlry City Tit. 1. But becaufe they did thefe things, we pretK 
they had fufficient warrant, though « have no exprefi Command^ 
corded for their fo doing. . ' 

I add further: You fuppofe (I prefume) that there B i/^/ 
Warrant fa z Weekly Sabbath bom Gen. i 1,3 . yet there is 
cxprefi Command fot it. 'Tisfaid that ffirfA/W (that is,heceafe 
to create,) but 'tis not faid that Man refied, or t^thewas M 
«A Tisfaid God blejfedthe Seventh-day and fanBified it. (^ 
thefe words may imply, I need not here difpute } But tis not 6 
that Man did fmBify or holy, or was W fo to do. God J 
<dtbc feventb fyi buthe did no more r^f "the /^ f/' 
JPWf, than the fix days of Creation. And if Man did fcndhfy or kfl 
holy 'that one day, it is not faid that he did or was Wto^keephoi 
tvfiy Seventh day to the Worlds end ; and that it muft be wl\M 
f«*£/i (in a continued circulation of Weeks from the CM 
"tion) and no other ; and that he muft begin every fuch day 1 
/few ri»w of the day as God did his Seventh day > or juit at j] 
fame time of the day as it was in Taradfe (at that moment vWI 
God ceafed to work) though at the fame moment " wereall hojj 
of the day in fome place or other. And if you would have us twj 
(becaufe you think fo) that all this is there implyed; y«certajj 
this is much fliort of an exprefi Command recorded, tor J»m 
1 fav for All this. For fuch were my words &ijc p. 4- lc JS 1 



Part II. 7be Chrifiia Sabbath. 1 J 

exprejly faid, that All mankind mujl, forever after, obferve Every 
Seventh-day in Every Week of Hays, reckoned continually from the 
IJirJl Creation, which, when you cite part of my words Repl. p. 6. 
[ you thought fit to omit. -Yet All this muft be fhewed to be exprejly 
commanded (according to your notion) or elfe fomewhat /f/fthan 
an exprefi Command Recorded, may ferve to>y% our Tra&ke, and 
intimate Gods Tleajm e. Lefs therefore than an Exprefs Command 
Recorded may ferve to Intimate God's Tleafure, and Warrant our 
Tracl 'fe as to the Lord's Day. 

In the next place, let us fee what may be alleged in the prefent ' 
cafe, to warrant our celebration of the Lords-day. 

That the ReSurretJion of Chnft, which dothaccomplifh the work 
of our Redemption (as Rom. 8. 34. Chri/i that died, yea rather that 
7s rifen again; Who died for our fins and rofe again for our jujlifica- 
ion, Rora. 4. 2f .} is a mercy doubtlefs that is worth remembering, 
nd therefore not improper for a folemn Commemoration, if at leaft 
we have any incouragement from Chrijij or the Apojlles praBife for 
fo doing; Once great partof the Chriftian Inftitution is founded on 
theApoftlespraclife, and that of the Primitive Church. 
, We find that Chnft himfelf, on the day of , his RefurreElton, the 
lirft day of the Week, or the firft day after the (Jews) Sabbath did 
firft appear to the good Women who fought him at the Sepulcher, 
declaring to them the Refurrctlion ( which was to preach to them a 
ew Doctrine of which before they were not aware,) and bid them 
11 it to the Difciples ; which they did, and thereupon P eter _ and 
obn (from the reft) went to the Sepulcher and found it fo : Which 
0 doubt put them nponferious thoughts, waiting what the ltlue of 
is might be. He then joins in company with mo 'Difciples going 
oEmmaus, (whethertwo of the Twelve, we know not; nor is it 
ery material ,0 finds them ingaged in Religious difcour/e ; And 
•tubes to them (from dMofes and the Prophets) the things con. 
crnin? bimfelf; Rays with them at Emmaus, continuing the lame 
ifcourfe and was known to them by breaking of bread ( celebrating 
' e Lords Supper,) all which are Religious imployments proper for 
e Celebration of fuck a day. He then comes to the pijaples at Je- 
-ifalem, preaches to them the fame Do6lrine , gives them his 
leffin? ( a firft and a fecond time ; ) blames their 1 unbelief confirms 
eir Faith, renews the promife of fending the Holy Glf; gives 
hem Commilfton he preaching the Gofpel, and planting tbtCbrtfba* 
'burcb; with power of ifflrules for confirmation or their Do- 
rine: As I thewed at large {Dife. p. 17,18,19,2°.) from Lukjt± 
oh. io. Mar. 16. All which put together looks very like tne CW?- 



ejtist Research 



f4 Chripsn Sabbath Part 1 1 

brat ion (if not the Confecration } of a Christian Sabbath, ox Day of 
Religious IVorfhip. 'Tis all Sabbatical work, and a great deal of it. 
And we have reafon to think (though it be not exprefty faid To J 
that he then gave them order to continue the like for the future. 

This matter of fa& you cannot deny ; but do ^cprcfly grant it, 
Hep. p. I9 ? zo, xi, and that all this was Religious fmphyment, fit 
exercife for fuch an occafion. Your little Exceptions, we re moftof 
thein anfwered before, But becaufe you repeat them, I muft re- 
peat the Anfwers. You fay, From ferufalem to Emmaus and back 
again, was more than a Sabbath days journey, yetChrift doth not re- 
/rwthctwoDifciples for fo traveling. True, (atleaftfo far as we 
know,) Nor was there any reafon for it. For they did not know when 
they began their journey^ what Chrift might do before the day was 
over. I might tell you alfo ( as here you (peak ) That he did not re- 
prove them, is not written. You fay, That Chriji did travel with- 
out fain, is not written. True. Nor is it material to me whether 
he did or did not. ( I do rather think, that, after his Refur region, 
lie was not fubjefl to Bodily Wearinefs.) But he was 9reachingz\\ 
the while (and then, whether fitting or walking is much one.) I 
hope you do not think it a breach of the Sabbath for a man to take 
pains inbreathing. You %, The Difciples being afemk/ed atje* 
rufalem was Providential True, The Providence of God fo ordered 
it that they fhould be there aflembled : But doth it thence follow 
that they were not reltpoufiy imployed f You fay, Toudo not know 
(becaufe it is not written) what they were then imployed about, un- 
lefs nlourning and weeping Mar. 16. 10. Do you know how Adam 
was imployed (all the day) on the Seventh day from the Creation ? 
That is no more written than this. You own thev were imployed 
in mourning and weeping. Very well : and was not mourning and 
weeping y at that time, a feafonable imployment? You do not know 
but that, with their mourning and weeping, they might add Prayer 
alfo ^religious "Difcourfs, zadferious Conjultation what they were 
to do in thefe circumfhnces, and waiting on God for direction there- 
in. Sure I am, you do not how ( nor is it written ) that they were 
imployed about any fervik work. Part of the time they were ( wc 
know) Rehgioujly imployed, and you do not Itnow but that they were 
foall the day. You would have it fuppofedRep.p. 33, that Pouts 
preaching in the Synagogue did comprehend his confeientious obfer- 
vwg the whole Sabbath day (though it be not written) and why may 
we not as wtWfuppofe, the difciples here were well imployed all the 
day ? Bu t you fay Chrifi appeared to the Eleven as they fate at Meat ; 
// was ds they fate at Meat. Very well. But do you think they might 

' not 



Part IT. Th ckiJli 

Chrift's faying to them UacTi ?JL\t'** f ***** * f 

fryer; but when God f avs j, >T„J£l eacc r be *»toyou, it i sa 

Uttve Benson. And Xh faid i » " " n 

fmd to them again , Peace £ 1,! , 3galn a fecond "me, (Jeius 

mdjm h unto them^Receive the HohrlmtiuArr m tbe >» 
they are remitted & c S * G *** • Wofi foever fins ye re- 

Orfnay Salutation? ButVulft 't^tfM F* a11 ^ bot » 
before Chrift came to them tSr k? ? ] " (not lowing, 
fo obferved) had on foine part of the cK dL?T " * day t0 be 
Mf s that we know not of wa , A • 7 , - e iomc ordinary b«fi. , 
fence follow Z^ltJZ^I'?* 1 ****? Or Lh L ' 

it) to be uhluToZleL^T^ ^ ^ ^ 
Chnficametothcmf SXlvt Jtf V?^^* r » aft " 
\hh titer the SeventhTam*^ But ' &**ti* 

\W do not find Stav a Zffl F " fi *9 ' 9r * ***** ( you fay ) 

'Math, fla^^^^i-be' 
whether there be not fmm • ' We arc J« mqii ring 

'bbaththen part.) Vefv Trt (meanin g> the J e ^s - 

R the Sabbath-day was^TfttefS ^ ^^r" 6 W occaCoa f " 
P r «ended that, befcre dS , Rrf„ !A; C ^""gwn": And'tisnot 

"^gious Imployments Vfh iX i l°J the Motion, by 

?at 8 more thanThat vouT^ , S °» n ? g °c° d PrC " dcnt * and 

" Seven A day, we read A lrod , r d mce r & en 

% we w eiiiVS Aan A a ?£ * 1 his Seventh-day 

■V9ks fo afcZ/J J a * ™«frM<itmt fo meet with hh 
Wsjo ajembled, an d was in a like manner imployed. ^/S 

fight. 



^ The ChrifkUn Sahhtth. Part II. 

ehht dm Chrifi appeared to the Vifapto, mi Thoma5 W '3 
ffiTri &x&iiteh^nmu (who was ; before abfent) as 
idllTthe red concerning the Refurreaion, and much in the fame 
!, ' ;, a3 before but with fomewhat more particular. That he 
did (om el w th he Wtoles ^«#«^, you do not deny; 
nor tlm they were fo implied. But you do not admit that -tor 

Av not > But becaufe then it would be on thefirfl day of the week 
T- tL other was ? ) And you are offended that I fhould take this to 
teaCavU Aft er fib dlys, you fay, may be the ninth or tentbdzj 
( fc r the fSff w «/«r, for all this is 

23 andyoucanfowawri/a^s^^ ^^f'L'^: 
But vou know alfo, that it is the ufual way in Scripture (and oth r 
whe rd "SSa to reckon inclufively. I gave yon feveral inl fances . » 
hat purpofLof which I (hall repeat fome. Mat. v~]. 6i . they tell 

fo/iW M ^fcr *6w Ay IftUrtfeagam 
lt% & ) meaning thereby tbc ttiri^f ^MlUl 
dTerefofe they pray Siat the Sepulchre might be made ft re till tit 
th Tdda] Wyftould have faid (according to .your 
thurth £y a ndfo forward; for to what purpofe would it be to fecu J 
TtiiS Oirily and no more, if the 

Xfter the thi/d day is pajl. Here, you .contefs *"J 
bv Sfrr /ir« <&W mull needs be meant ttU after the tmd day is 

t Mr. 8 . j i . The Son of Mm mud be fed and After three dd 
rifeaglin; that is, onthehirdd^Mf An Ihere alfo ^ 
own ( Rep- p. is. ) that it mull be fo underftood The Cruapm 
(2 feT «i i Wrf ^ £ef*rre8ton <>»thefir({M 

Yfthe lit week ; and therele, by After three days urn***. fA 
lart of the fmh day, the whole Seventh day,andpait of the mm 
fi owr ^therefore that in thefe places after three days muft nej 
bVAe^m7»?s»/fc^^- And why not as well 
*V the fame as on the eighth day. A 
After eight days, you lay, ts m where explained to be tbebim 
^/whatWt thereniay be in te™to u ~^<&^ 
I "cannot tell: But doth it no where 

.W EL* i n ^hen Eight days were Accompl fled {fir the & 
^Jnonofth Child) they Ml his name of Jefus? 'tis all on 
Zfh^ih\%Jere Lomplijhed as to 
come? Ancfthis alfo you own f^p.H)f^f 
Sow If after three /ays fignify no more but after the third day* 
tome: whv foould wYnot think that after eight days doth as * 



Part II. Tk CkriftM Sdlah i 7 

after the eighth day was come; that is, as weufc to foeak in 
Englifh, on that dayjen-nigbt. Sure we arc, it was not on the Je w 
rjb Sabbath J for it was, to that, but Seven days, not after Eight days.) 
.lis manifeft therefore that our Saviour made choice of another 
day than the Je-wifb Sabbath, /or thefe Sabbatical Works : And I 
think it is plain to be tbeftrji day of the week. 

Tie give you one text more, (which I did not name before, be- 
Jcanfe I would not trouble you to compute it,) A3. 24. 1. After five 
days, Ananias the High-Priejl defcended with the Elders and with a 
certain Orator named Tertullus who informed the Govermur againji 
Foul. After Jive days, that is, cm the fifth day (after Paul's being ap- 
prehended.} How doth that appear, (you will ask) finceit is «* 
where explained, that this after five days is on the fifth day t Tie fhew 
you presently. Feul ernes to Jerttfalem, Ail.xu 17. that was one 
.day. The day following ('tis faid) Paul went in with us unto James, and 
fiff the Elders were frefent, ver. t8. Who then advife him. thus , 
/Wehave four men which have a Fow on them; take them and purify 
thy felf with them, &c. ver. 13,24. that's a Second day. Then?W 
took the men and the next day (there's a Third day ) purifying him- 
felf with tbem, entered into the temple, to fignify the accomplifbment 
tf the days of t Purificatim } yet. \6. (which we find to be the fpace 
tf feven days, Ntem. 6. 1 3. inclufively from that Third day ; which 
were therefore to end on the Ninth day.) But when the /even days 
mere aimofi ended, ver. 1*7. not, when tbelafi of thofe jeven were all. 
tended (for we have not days enough for that) but, thefeventh 
„ was aimofi come (for when that day was come, the j "even days 
'tn accompli/bed, according to that Luk. 2, 11.) that is, on the 
jth day of thofe /even, which was the Eighth day from his coming 
>jferufalem. On this Eighth day the Jews laid 'bands on him } ver.i 7 . 
id when they were about to hill him, the chief Captain rejeued him 
id carried him into the Cajlle, ver- 3 1, 34. On the morrow (which 
'as the Ninth day) he was brought down before the Counfel, Chap, 
i. 30. where be made bis defenfe, Chap. 23,1. and was brought back, 
the Caftle, ver. 10. That night the Lord flood by him to comfort him, 
*er. 1 r. ('tis faid that night, the night or that nmthday, not c» the ■ 
morrow night, as if it were the night of the tenth day.) and when 
■ was day (that is on the Tenth day) more than four ty of the Jews 
*ded together to kill bim, ver. 11,13. of which con (piracy when 
^ouPs iinfman had informed the chief Captain, ver. 16, io ? 2i. he 
fent him that night (the night of the tenth day,) with a guard, to 
Antipatris ver. 13, 3 1. from whence on the morrow (which was the 
Eleventh day) he cametoCe/area ver. 32,33. (which Eleventh day 



is 



1 8 The ChriflUn Sabbath. Part II 

is the wrnow after, the third hour of the night foregoing, not the 
fame day with it.) When they came to Cefarea, Felix commanded 
him to be kept in Hcrods Tud^menUhall, till his Accufcrs fhould come } 
ver. j) . (which was on the next day.) And after five days, Chap.iA.T. 
(not, from the Eleventh on which be was brought to Cefarea y but 
from the Eighth on which he was feifed in the Temple) the High 
Triejl and Elder s y witbTertullu^a Lawyer, came down to info tni 
againft him. Now, if after five days be meant of the fifth day (from 
IttM Eighth) inclufively .(taking that Eighth day for.the firft of the 
five) this will be on the Twelfth day ; it on the fifth day after (cx- 
ciulivc of that eighth day) it will be on the Thirteenth; if after 
Jive whole days (befide. that eighth) were pad, it muft be the Fom - 
teenth from his firll coming to Jerufalem. And which of the three 
it was, Yaul.tt)\% us at ver. ll. Thou mayji underftand (faith he to 
the Governour) that there are yet. but Tuuehe daysfincc I went up to 
Jerufalem for to worfhip So that after five days muft be meant of the 
fifth Jay current, mclujively ; otherwife it would have been thirteen 
or fourteen days from his coming to Jerufalem to worfhip. Now if 
St. Lu&> by when e ght days were accomplijhed do mean the eighth 
day current Luk. 2. %i. and the fzmc SvjLuke by after five days do 
mean the fifth day current (inclufively ) Aff. 24. 1. And S. Mat hew 
(Chap. m. g.) and S Math (Chap. 8. 3 1.) by after three days do mean 
the third day inclufively y why fliould not S John (Chap. 20. i(5.) be 
thought to fpeak the lame language, by after eight days meaning the 
eighth day inclufively. Efpeciaily, when there is no appearance of 
itafon to-the contrary, lave that it doth not favour your Fanfy. 

And Levit. 2$. 15-, 16. Te frail count unto you } trom the morrow 
after the Sabbath {from the day that ye brought thejbeaf of the wave* 
offering) [even Sabbaths IbaU be compfeat ; even unto the morrow after 
the feventb Sabbath fl)allyc number fifty days. Which cannot be, un* 
lefs the firft and laft day be taken into that number, inclufively. And 
if thefe ( with what \ faid before ) be not enough, you may find 
many more if you plcafe to fearch. 

Alike reckoning we have, concerning Cornelius, KSt. 10. Corne- 
lius faw a Vif ion about the Ninth hour of the day ver. %. ( that's one 
day.) When the Vifion was ended, he prefently fent twofervantr 
zndzfoufdier for 7V/<r, ver. 7, 8, as ho was dire&ed. On the mor- 
row ! that's a fecond day) Teter went up to pray about the fixth hour f 
and faw a Vifian likcwife, ver. 9. &c. Which being ended, the men 
who were fent from Cornelius, were (by that time) come, and en» 
fuiredht him, ver. 17, 18. He went down to them y called them in f 
and lodged them that nighty »ver. 3.1, aj. On the mormw (that's * 



Part If. The ChriJtUn SaUath. r 9 

third day) be vent with them from Joppastx. 23! On the mono* 
*fter (that s a fourth day) they entered into Cefarea, where Census 
waited Jor them, (ver a + j who tells him (ver. 30. 1 Four days ago 
Wwsfaftnig &c ( relating the caufe why he feat for Peter.) Now 
it that ( bcore this) was four days ago, this (after that) raufl be 
days ajter ; which was (as is roaniteft.) the fomthday, inclufively. 

L u l T m ? y 6 more to tll,s P ur P ofe in ta y fiiftoafe p. 20, at, il 
■which I do not repeat, becaufe you feem to think (Sep. 0. n.> 
[there is too much already. \ r 1 1 

JWmbave never heard, you fay, much lefs do IVe commonly fo [peak; 
-that after eight days, is that day fe'nnighti I luppofe you lav the 
■mphalis on IVe; that is, IVe in England do not commonly fo 
ipeak. But, you know in other lanaiages (and, I think, inrf 
other ) they do io fpeak. I need not tell you that, What we calU 
* might, a Fortnight, the FiencliVall huifi fours, winze fours, 
that is, Eight days Fifteen days 1 Nor need I tell you that S.Lttke 
did not fpeak k.ngl,fh, nor did he live in England. 

But,after all this ienfing (PmuMjot call uplifting) do yoti indeed - 
Mink that after eight days, in this place, is not meant of the fame 
day in the next, week] And do yon 10 think (as you phrafoit) with- 
out doubt orjcruple ? You fay ( Sep. p. lt ) you do not difcern buc 
thnitmaybe (the fecond or thirddavof the next week) but do 
Jou think // is jo ? Confider of it. And if what I fay now benot 
enough, look over alfo what I laid before. 

And you do not produce any place where this form of Speech is 0. 
Wferwiie to be underfbed. Onely two places you mention, where you 
hinkpolfibly//*^. Which I lhall confider. MaLx6.x.Tckmw 
'bat after two days is the Tajfover, and the Son of Man is betrayed to be 
crucified: J eems to be meant (you (ay Sep. p\ 2l .) after two days exchi. 
freiy, that is, excluding the day on wbichthat was faid. If you think 
0, I cannot help it. Nor can you help it if I think otherwife. 
'take it to be thus, Afttrtwo days, otthet -e are but two days ( to 
Tnf d / onioirou 'l (at evening) J Jhall eat the Vaflmr, and 
1 7 t b i tra y edt0 tewifod'- And ver.a.' while (in the mean time) 
J, cl,ie ftrtcjh &c. (we are told ver, 3,4, y) were affembled. con. 
Wmg how they might take Jefus by fnbtfety and tyl him. After 
wnich 10.lo.ws prefently, ver: 6. Now when Jefus was in Bethany, 
\]>'z. the lame day ; there came aWdman {-viz.' Mary the Sifter of 
Uzarus ) n h. u. z .) with an Mtfier Box of Ointment, and poured 
«« his had, ver. n. IVhich when the difciplesjawit, they (that is, 
one ot t hem, meaning Judas Ifcatiot, Joh. 1 1. s ) (aid. wherefore is 
"* waft, it might have been Jo!d and given to the poor &c ver. 8, 9. 

C i "* {net 



20 Tk Chrtpsn Sabhatk Fart II. 

mot that he cmedfor tk poor, fat becaufe he had the bag, Joh. n. 6.) 
To whom when Jefus had given an unpleafing anfwer, The poor you 
have always with you^z. tw,I%t#U,iJ. then Judas went unto 
the bkb Prifts, and agreed to betray him, ver. 14, ly, itf- Acw 
pft day of unleavened bread ( the latter of thofe two days ) the dh 
faples came unto Jefus faying, 'where wilt thou that we prepate the 
fafs-wer&Q. ver. 1-7,18,15. Now when Even was come, he fit t 
SJownwiththeTweke &c. ver. ao. And the fame night (being the 
latter pf the two days mentioned ver.z.) he was betrayed by Judas i 
as follows in the Chapter. The words After two days being taken 

indufively. , 

A like Anfwer may ferve for your other Infhncc (tor you have 
but two) concerning the Two Witnefjes Rev. u. 11. After three 
days md an half the fpirit entered into them, and they flood upon then 
feet &c. that is, AfUr three dtys and an half were come ; (not after 
three days and an half were paft,) as it is every where elie. Nor do 
you sive us one inltance to the contrary, where it niuft be other, 
wife underftood. And yet I mult not call this trifling, or fay that 
lam forryto fee it. For you yet infill upon it Sep. p. U< that // ft 
not jo weak, as the Voflor reprefents it. , 

But, you fay further, Sep. p. 24. If after eight dttys did here m 
elude tbefirft of the eight, and exclude the day after the eighth, ( as 
doubtlefs it doth ;) Tet here is no abrogating the Seventh-day-(abbatk } 
nor mftituting the Firfi, This you fliould have faid at firfi, ( without 
quareling at after etgbt days.) But we are not now inquiring What 
is to become of the Seventh-day, ox Whether the Firfi thai! be called 
a Sabbath ; But, whether here be not a fecond Precedent for celebraj 
ting the firfi day. And thefc Two Precedents^ in the Two Ftrft 
Weeks from the Refurre&ion, are Precedents of Chrifi himfelt 
with his P/fciples; and a good Pattern for them and us to follow. 
On how many more firft-days he did fo appear to them, we knovi 
not ; We do not read that he did, nor do we read that he did not. 

The next Precedent is that of Tentecoft. {TJifc, p. Chrifi 
on the day of the Refurreftion (the firlt day of the week) had Jtfi 
newed his promife of fending the Holy~Ghoft { Luk. 24. 4? - ) and oft 
the day of Pentetofi (the firU day of the Week alfo) he Fulfilled thJ* 
- promife, Aff. x. in a miraculous manner. They were all with ont 
neat din one place f ver r. (they were qnanimoitfty affefflbled as oft 
a folenm occafton,) when the Holy Ghoft fell upon them in the 
iwilitude of Ckven.Toiptes, ver. 2, 5,4. And 'Peter preached to* 
great Congregation {v\Parthians y Medes, Ekmites, &c. vn\ 7 Aft 
io, u, \%*) upon thatoccaiion, ver, &c. and with fo good (u^ 



Part II. Tk Chriftian Sabbath 2 f 

cefsj as that the fame day were added to them about three thoufand 
fouls, ver. 41. Now that here was a very fokrnn Religious Affembly 
on the day of Pentecoft, attended with fuch Miraculous Succefs,^ 
do not deny ; But will not allow it to be the firfi day of the weefc 
Sep. p. ?<S. Tm know (you fay ) no Word for that, nor other ground 
hut Conjectures, and ibme Romifh Traditions in the cafe ? I thought I 
had proved it very plainly Dift. p.37, 38. (not out of the Swuins, 
but) from Levit.\$. (ol which you pleafe to take no notice.) 
The Wave-offering was to be the morrow after the Sabbath ver. n. 
trnd ye fija/l count toyou from the morrow after the Sabbath, from the 
day that ye brought the Wave -offering, [even Sabbaths pall be compkat, 
even unto the morrow after the feventh Sabbath fhallye number fifty 
days ; and then was to be the feaft of weeks or Tentecoft : And is 
aot the morrow after their Sabbatb,tht fa ft day of their week t Which 
proof isfo clear, that you thought belt to fay nothing of it, but 
mher to talk of Romifh Traditions, If the word Tenteccft difpleafe 
ilou (that is, the fiftieth day,) infteadof what is called the feaft of 
Weeks, Deut. 16. p, 10; I had it not from any Romifh Tradition, 
but from AH. i. 1. and 1 Cor. 16. 8. 

\ Now if I were as fond to ftretch ( for an Inflitution ) as fome- 
times you feem to be ; how fair an opportunity is there from hence 
to urge, that, befide the weekly Sabbath on the Seventh day, God 
hath here appointed the feaft of Tentecoft, on- the morrow after the 
Sabbath , which feaft of Pentecofl was to be a Sabbath alfo {no fer* 
Vtk work to be done thereon, Levit. 23.1. and your felf call it a Sab- 
hath, Rep. p. 48.) as if it had been dejfigned as a type or forerunner 
of the Chrifi ion Sabbath to fucceed on the morrow after the Jewijh 
mihatb. I might urge the fame from the Wave -offering, ver. io,ti, 
which was alfo to°be the morrow after the Sabbath^ ver. n. and 'tis 
called the feaft of firfi fruits; Te JbaUbringa Sheaf of the Firfi 
Fruits of your harveji, ver. 10. before which Jirft fruits fo brought, 
they were not to eat any thing of the harvefl, neither bread f nor 
parched corn, nor green ears, vex. 14. And with allufion to this Feaft 
%f firfi fruits (on the morrow after the Jewifh Sabbath) Chrifi (ri- 
ling on the firfi day of the week ) is faid to be rifen from the dead, 
the f j ft fruits of them that flept, \ Cor. i$\ 20. and again ver. 25. 
Chrft the pft fruits, afterward thofe that are Cbnjl; which/rtf 
fruits , both in the Type, and in the Anti-me, was to be themonow 
ijtei- the Seventh-day fabbathi and it felf a kind Sabbath alfo>* holy 
Convocation, cn which no fervile workjliail be done. Which two Feaifs 
{of the Firfi -fruits raid Venteaft) ieem to be the fore-r tinners of 
another Sabbath to be m the morrow after the Seven th-dayjabbatb. 

But 



gitized by the Q 



^search 



22 The ChriftUn Sdtatk part II. 

But you tcl] us Rep. p, 36. Tifl you can prove by the IVordtht 
-Pentecoft was on the SeventbJay-fabbath, and not upon the firft day cf 
the JVetk. By what/j^W? certainly not by the Word of God; Fof 
that ftys exprcfly tomorrow after the Seventh Sabbath Lev. 13,1c, 
Ymi fay, C brill Kept the Tafs-over on one day and the Jews on another. 
What then? On whatever day Chart kept the Pafs-over, thisdorh 
not make the morrow after the Sabbath mi to be the fir jl day of the 
Week- Tou do not certainly knovo (you fay) what was the fiftieth day 
from the true day on which Chriji and his drfcip/es J^pt the Pafsover, 
Nor is it any thing to the purpofe if you did know it. Tis your 
great millake here (and again p. ^8.) to think tkcftfiydqys are to 
be reckoned from the day of the 'fa/s^er: they are to be reckoned 
fronuhe day of the Wave^ojfering, the morrow after the Sabbath (on 
which was to be the Wave-offering) and fifty days from thence is 
exprefly called the morrow after the feventb Sabbath. A like miftake 
it is when you take the Month Nifan to be the firft New- Moon after 
the Pernal Equinox, Enq./>. 121, and that the Month or Moon Nil a* 
began after the Vernal Equinox > p. 122. For the Month Nijan of 
Ahib, was that whofe Full-Moon was next after the Vernal Equinox 
(or which was reputed fo to be) though its New-Moon was oft be- 
lore it, and might be fourteen days before. The fourteenth day 
might be before the Equinox, if but the Fifteenth day (the day of 
the FuU~Moon, firft day of the Feaft ) were on or after the Equi- 
nox : oratleaft, by the Prieft reputed fo to be. But what you fug- 
geft as doubtful, p. i % i. whether the fourteenth day was not reckoned 
from the day of the Equinox^ is yet more extravagant. For how can 
the fourteenth day of the Month be the Fourteenth day from the Equi*> 
noXy unlefs wc would fanfy the day of the Efuinox to be always 
New-Moon. But this doth not concern our contrive rfy. 

And this confidence (of proving it by tbe (Voi d to be the Seventh* 
dayfabbath when the Word fays exprcfly it is the morrow after tk 
Sabbath) is like what you tell us Enq. p, 4 j. and do again iniiit upon 
it, Rep. p. 3?, 36. of Cbrifls Afcvifion on the Sabbath-day; ( andthe 
day of Judgment likewife.) When yet in the fame Chapter the time 
of Chrifts abode with them after his Refurreftion is exprefly faid 
to he forty days, Aft. 1,3, (of which the day of his Refurre&ioA 
was the Firft, and the day of his AfcenUon was the Laft;) And, if 
ihe firft of thefe Forty were (as is copfssft) the firft day of the week, 
how is it poifihle that the laft of the F<?rty can be the Seventh-day f 
But fee how far Fanfy can carry a man, when it works ftrongly ! ) 

Butbecaufe you do yet infill uppa it (Rep. p. jj>}6.) thacGir^J 
dfccnfion may be, on a Sabbath day f nomthihuding fc clear a proof 

frori 



Part IT- The Qhrifthn Sdbath. 2 > 

'om Scripture, that it was thefy? ot four ty days, whereof the M 
^Sunday and therefore the laft mult needs be Thurfday y not *1 
"T > *i] h * d p- 3 J, in Anfver to vour En*. „. . . 

'JlJconiider once more what you bring for proof of it 
Two things vou offer by way of Argument, Firft, that it is faii 
iMount OJtvet ( rrom whence Chrift aicended) is fiid to be about a 
ftibzth days journey from Jtrufalem ; and therefore on a Sabbath-day 
■nd then, that Chrift and his dftiples were then affembled and 
Vhrifi preached ; therefore on a Sabbath-day. Which I fhall confidcr 
mdtinaly, 

i:As to the firft, You tell us Rep p. 3* that a Sabbath Jays <cm. 
f.was of old efteemed about two miles; (how old, vou do not tell 
:) now what's tbis but Tradition ? And 'tis agreed, you take it by 
tographers, that tShhunt Olivet is about two Miles from7erufaJem. 
Admit it he fo, what then ? The Cities of the Levites (vou fay) were 
breach two thoufand Cubits from without theCity 7 Numb. \$ s 
Tills, I doubt, is a miftake, for it is, ver, 4. the Suburbs of the Cities 
Wnh youjhall give to the Levites JhaB reach from the Wall of the 
my and outward^ a thousand (not two thoufand) cubits roundabout. 
« that from without the City was but one thoufand Cubits ; but 
>m the middle was to httwo thoufand, as at ver. 2e JhaSmca- 
v from without the City; (that is, inward from theutmoft bounds 
tothe middle of the City; for fo the words are (michxts lagnir) 
jrofn without to the City, ) on the Eatl fidt two thoufand Cubtts, and 
™ South Jide two thoufand Cubits, and on the Weft-fide two thou^ 
^Cubits, and on the North-fide two thoufand Cubits, and the City 

be in the midfe this pall be to them the Suburbs of the City 
it 15, the utmoftlompals of the Suburbs, in the midft whereof is 
City. But in ver.^. the City is not meafured, but from the 
U of the City outward; for fo the words are (mihkir bagnir va- 
tf a ) from the (Vatt of the City outward: So that from the utmoft 
ids to the wall ^ was one thoufand Cubits, and from thencstothe 
*Mc was another thoufand Cubits; and therefore the length or 
Ith of the City from Wall to Wall, two thoufand Cubits ; (not 
Miles.) and from the utmoft bounds of the Suburbs, to the midft 
tthe City, was two thoufand Cubits : And, if you mean thus, we 
"iai to this point agreed. You tell us alio that in Jojh. 3. 3, 4. 
'» the Ark was for n toward Jordan, the people were to go after it* 
there was to be a f pace bet ween them and it, about two thoufand 
Hts by meafure, they were not to come nearer to it. Admit this 
• What then ? Is it any where in Scripture faid that two thou- 
'd Cubits is a Sabbnthdays journey! Now what tbofe Cubits in. 

x me a* 



Digitized by the C 



itist Research 



^ Tk thrift** Sabbath. Part. El 

meafuredtd extend^ the Jews, voufay, could beji tell us, (perhaps 
better than You or I) bin what then ? WM thought it (you fay ) + 
bout two Miles. What's this but Jewifh Tradition t it they did fa 
But pray tell me, Which of all their Rabbins tells you that tw\ 
tboufand cubits^ are/w miles ! Mr. Ainpworth in his Annotations 
on Exod. 16. (from whence I fuppofc you borrow mod of this) 
who was acquainted with the Jevcsznd the Jetvi/h meafures better 
than fo, mafees it not above me mile ; Jx Italitm or EngUp Mrft:\ 
(and 'tis indeed not fo much :) why do you make it twice fa mucbfl 
A Mile {miUefafus) is a thoujand paces, and tmmde, is tm thm\ 
fandpaces, Can you think a thouj'and cubits are as much as a thm 
fond paces f No,nor half fo much. For a cubit is but about half ay ar^ 
that is one foot and a half, or eighteen inches ; and a pace njhe foil 
You are out in your Meafures therefore as well as in your Humbert 

It had been ihorter work ( if you had a mind to let us know 
what you think tp be the lengtfrof a Sabbath-days journey) to baj 
laid in brief, 'lis agreed by Geographers that Mount Oliyet isfr&\ 
Jerusalem about two miles, which is here called a Sabbath-days jof*i 
my ; and therefore a Sabbath-days journey, is about two miles. Whicb 
had been plain and eafy, without troubling your felf or us ( as y#j 
fpeak) with dark cwje&ures and jeme uncertain (not Rornilh, but)] 
fewijb Traditions^ which you can make nothing of Thofe (Rabbins) 
who think a Sabbath-days journey to be tm thoajand cubits, do frt 
think it to be two miles i and thofe who think it to be two Mi*h 
think it tube much more than two thouj'and cubits (for thefe mea- 
fures are inconfiftentj) nor do I know that *ny man before you, 
did think a cubit to be five fie t. 

But, be it more or lefs, the length of a Sabbath-days journey Jj 
nothing to our purpofe ; The text fays, Then they { the difeiple&) 
returned to Jerusalem, from the dMomt called ! Olivet ? % iw \yy*t 'fy* 
which was near to Jerufalem (and therefore it was not far H 
go) but how near? AftoN i& US* containing a Sabbath-days jm 
stey. But what then ? If a Sabbath-days journey were then the knotfi 
name of a Jewifh tneafure, was it not as near on a Thurfday, as od* 
Saturday t 'Twas near, he tells you, and how near ; but he doth fl* 
tell you w what day. Nor need he ; for when he had before 
fied that it was the fourtieth day from the Refurreftion, which 
on Sunday (thefirftday of ttie week ) we might know (withe* 
telling) that the fourtieth day muft needs be Thurfday^ (the fiW 
day of the week) not on Saturday, the Sabbath day. But becaufe 
the diftance is here defigned by the length of a Sabbath-days jot*r*$ 

known length, it fcems, arnongft the Jews) you fonfy it nu* 



Digitized bv the Cp 



PartIL ThtQhriftim Sabbath. „ 

needs be «r the Sabbath day, (as if it were not the fame length every 
day ai the week:) And this fan fy, oiuft bear down CocktrapZ} 
that it could be no other than Thurjday, the fifth day of the week 
as being the laB offourty, whereof the firfl was Sunday. It feem, 

GtiZV™"** jVt "^"Hty would be mnui- 
ficive When and Where fo confidence a thing happened as was 
our Saviour Afcenjion, and whereabout that place lay ■ So he tells 
them it was he Fourtieth day from his SefurreBion on the firs! 
day of the week, it was from a place called Mount Olivet, which was 
near to Jerufalem, and no farther from it than a Sabbath Jay walk 
t, You ^ r «<>nd Argntnent, which I promifed to confider, was, 
, That Cbrttt and his Dijafles were then ajemhled, and Chris! preachl 
ed. Enq.p.^ Now it you admit this as a good Argument to 
( prove it a Sabbath day; I think it ferves our turn better than 
' yours. For, that Chriil and bis 2)ifciples were affembled on the 
the day of the Refurreflion the firfl day 0 f the week, is certain 
• and pait difpute : And it is as certain, that he did then preach to 
' ? em ' r ,? ut how doth it appear that he preached to thein on th? 
j Jay ot his AJcenfion ? It's like enough that lie did ( on whatever 
day it happened to be ) give them a Farewell Difcourfc ; hut it 
f U not here /aid Co. Tis faid indeed that during the fourty days 
wherein he was feen of them, he had given commandments to He 
^pojiles, to whom he hajjbewed himfelf alive after his Taffm b« 
many infallible proofs fpeaking to them of the things pertaining title 
kingdom of God ; and had (when he ajfembled with them) commanded 
them to wait atjernfalem till they jbould receive the Holy-Ghosl.as he 
had before promifed them, (A£b . . 2, j,^ which I do acknowledge 
to be f reaching : But on which of the fourty days he thus preached 
( we are not told m this place, ( but only that it was daring thefe 
fourty days : ) ^ut in Luke 24. ver. 3 <S. to the end of ver. 4 p. { and 
in the parallel places m the other Evangelifts ) we ae told m 
; vbat iity All this was done, namely, on the day of his RefuneHion. 
00 that, if this preaching, to them Jfjembkd, do prove a Sabbath, 
day, it proves the firfl day of the week to be a Sabbath. We find 
nothing new on the day of his Jfcenfun, ( Ait 1. 6, 7 ) but his au- 
jwenng to that queftion, JTiU thou at this time refiore the kingdom 
to Ijrael ? to which his Anfwer was, // is not for you to know the 
times andjeafons, &c. And I fuppofe, it is from the clearnefs of 
wis my Anlwer, that in your Reply p. jy, 36. von think fit to 
wave this Argument. I am here, only to beg the Readers par- 
oon, lor holding him fo long in the Anlwerine of thefe two Acur- 
»ents, which did fo little need it. 

D The 



t g fk Chrifun Sabbath. Part II 

The next Precedent is from ASs ia -> which, though zfingle 
infhncc, doth fairly intimate an ufua! praffifr of fo doing. Upon 
the fir (I day of the week, when the Vifciples came together to break 
bread. Taul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow, and 
continued his jpeech until midnight, Tis here plain, that on the fir ft 
day of the week there was a Religious Apmbly, as appears by their 
religious exercile therein \ and that it was a Chrtjltan Affembly, tor 
it was the Dtjaplcs were thus jiflembled, and they were aflerable^ 
to break bread, a Chrifiian Service ; and ( as appears by the circum- 
fhnces)agreat Aflembly, it was the Dfciples (wr va*w&* ) not 
( *,£>) fome of them; and fo many as to be mounted up to the 
third loft ver. p. and Paul preached to thera a long Sermon, contu 
nuing his jpeech till midnight. Which I take to be z fourth Precedent 
of celebrating thefirftday for religious fervice. 

To this you make many exceptions, (that the number ot them 
Tiiavfupply their want of weight.) ' t t 

Firft you except, (Enq^.^.) this is but once, it is but one Fact 
(And this One, Once, is repeated more than once, twice, or thrice, 
gnq, n we have it ten times within lefs than the quantity 

of one page.) But one fuch Precedent of celebrating the Seventh day 
Sabbath, ( after Gods Refting Gen.*, i, jl and before that of ExU\6.) 
would do you fpecia] fervice, if you could find it. And this once is fo 
fot down as fairly to intimate it was wont fo to be. And the fir ft day 
of the week, when they were come together to breakbread, 7>aul preach* 
edfrQ. would fairly intimate to a candid Reader,that they then came 
together to break bread as being the fir ft day of the week; on which 
they nfed to come together for that purpofe. I had put a cak, 
Diicp. 58, ( which you have not thought fit to anfwcrJ it you 
could find in the Book of Job, that on the feventh day of the week 
when Job and his friends were afjembled for the joynt fervtce of God, 
Bildiidfpake thus, &c. whether you would rtot think u a eood proot 
that the feventh day Sabbath was then wont to be obferved ? I put 
the cafe again for you to confide r of ' 

You then except {if I undedhnd you aright) to the word Preached. 
For fo your words are, Em. p. {* t0 objeffto* 

( that is, to our Argument from this place ) the Reader (you lay) 
may tak notice that the Greek word here l?reacbedYis the fatnt 
word which is rendered [Reafened] ABs 17, 2, and Ms \ 8. 4- 
Which I do not fee how it can come m by way of Anfwer to our 
Argument otherwife than by extenuating the word Preached,** 
too high a word for this place, the fame Greek word (Jtafipit ) be- 
ing elfgwherc tranOattd ReafonU To which my anfwer was 



Part 11 The ChriftUn Sabbath. 2 7 

this (Difc.p.ip.) Beitfo; and, if that word will pie afe him belt ei , 
let it befo here ; Be Reafoned, t>ifcourfcd, Treated, or did Hold- 
forth ; (that, I think will mt alter the cafe ; J and he Continued or 
Held-cn {^inm ) this Difcourfe, this Speech, this Sermon t 
Sermonem) till mid-night ; he hetdon this Holding-forth till mid- 
night ; ) which I take to be the fame thing with what we now call 
Preaching, or very like it: ('twas a long continue d'Dij tour ft 7 to a 

' Congregation met together upon a Religious account, for the Service of 
God ) But let it be called ( if he pleafe ) A Religious Difcourfef of 
the Holy Apojile, to a Congregation of Chriflians, met together foi 
fuch a purpofe. This is the whole of what I faid on this occafion/ 

L 1 But with this you are highly difpleafed ; Repl.p^i. He renders 

I (you fay) J)*^ Holding-forth; (No, The Dr.renders h?reached t 
but gives you leave, it you like that word better, to rendc. 
Held forth ; ) and this rendering Holding-forth the 2)r. does twice \ 
And p. i%. This (of fuggeftmg Reajbned intezd of Preached) the 
PoSorfeems to take offence at: ( No ; but allows you fo to reudci 

I it) and gives leave to render it Taul did hold forth * ( yes, or by any 
of thefe other words I mentioned; ) and [tnjiead of He cwtmu$d 
his fpeech ) that he Held on his Holding forth till midnight. Which 
Ixpreffton of Holding- forth hath been much abujedinthis Age by fome 
Men, againff Eminently Holy and Learned Non-conforming Mini- 

' fters } when they have been accufed as Male favors for preaching the 
Gofpel y to fcorn, reproach anddefpije them as Holders forth, &c. And 
the Exprefjion of Holding-forth being ta{en in an is and defpightfut 
jenje by fome who fo ufe it ; I think the Potior might have (pared 

: to put it upon <paul 7 who in preaching Chrift was then a Noti con- 
formist Minifler; and it feems, if it were not written incautehufly, 
to be Highly Blamable. In which Expreffions of Holdmg-forth 7 
with others afterwards which refer to Spiritual Fraying and Traifwg, 
as this does to Preaching the Gojpel, (Does the Doftor any where 
fpeak againft Spiritual Praying, ^raffing or Preaching t ) the DoBor 
goes m bad Company, and I doubt highly gratifies them while he 
writes fo agreeably to their Language. IVhich words of the Zfoftor, 
however written with fome feeming foftnefi, are a very III Bleat, if 
they were meant, which I hope they were not, as they are commonly 
underjiood by all Good and Sad Men that I know. And all this but 
for Naming the woiti Holding-forth, though with allowance. 
• Now what need all this ? Tantme animis coelejlibus ira ? Do 
Hot you know, that the Phrafe of Holding-forth was taken up by 
Non-conformifts t about the Year 16*42 or 1643, as I remember, 
( at Ieaft I do not remember to have heard it fooner : It might 

D i perhaps 



ftv.entist Research 



28 The CbrijtiM Stbbtib. Part II. 

perhaps by the Dijfenting Brethren be brought with them out of 
Holland) and in contradiitinftion to the word Preaching? and ufed 
by them ( or fome of them ) fo long and fo frequenly, till it began 
to be thought a ridiculous AffeEiation, and did afford matter of 
Drollery to thofe that a mind to be pleafant ? ( And whether or 
no the word be yet left off, I do not know ; though now the word 
Speaking be come in ufe in the fame fenfe. ) It was taken up upon 
this occafion ; when it grew frequent for Gifted-Brethren ( if I 
may fo call them without offence, as they were wont to call them- 
felves) to fpeak publickly in their Meetings 5 they were then fliy 
of calling this Preaching, but called it ( by a fofter name ) Holdings 
forth ; and 'twas ufual to ask, IVho heldforth to day t But when 
they began to be laughed out of this, it was then lVho did fpeak to 
day t Not thinking it fit to call it 'Preachings when the Speaker^ 
was not a Minifter or other Churth-Officer. And I know no 
great hurt in the word (faving that it feeps a Needlefi JffcHation, ) 
For to Sew forth, or Hold-forth {exhibere) are in themfelves no 
bad Exprefiions, ( and the beft words that are may be drolled-upon, 
or turned into Ridicule, by thofe who have a mind fo to do 5 ) and 
therefore (though I would not choofe to ufe it, yet) if others pleafe 
fo to fpeak, I can admit it. And,in this place, if vou do not like 
the word preaching, I am content jou make ule of your own 
woid } or any of thofe mentioned, or any of a like import : For, 
what ever yon pleafe to call it, this jDifcourfe of "Paul to a Chri- 
ftian Congregation, was at lcaft a Religious Exercife on tht fir ft day 
tf the week; Which ferves the prefent Argument as well as if you 
call it Reaching. And I thought I had accommodated the mat- 
ter with fuch a temper, as might ferve both ; If you neither 
like the word Preaching, nor Ho/dingforth ; Let it be called a Reli- 
gious Wfcowrfc, of the Holy Apoftle, to a Congregation of Chrtftians, 
met together for fuch a purpefe. Which I take to be inoftenfive 
words. 

Bin 'tis further aggravated that the Doftor does twice fo render 
it. No ; but does twice permit you fo to ufe it if you pleafe. And 
truly if in the firffc place you render A»*i>r» by held-forth, it is 
very proper in the fecond place to render t\ Ktyp by bo/ding-fortki 
for xiy& is but a Noun from the fame Verb Aty*. And whether 
**fimti be rendered by continuing or holding %n y is much one, for 
they iignifie both alike : and then I know not what (in thisfecond 
place ) fhould offend you anew, unlefs the paronomafia ( of holding- 
on his holdingforth ) offend your Ear. And if neither preaching nor 
holdmgfort h do pleafe you, I gave you the choice of a great many 
other words. ' BuC 



rt II. The Chrifoan Sabbath, a 9 

But fince the Exprcffton of Holding-forth, hath been taken in an III 
'Defpightful fenfe by fome, ( you do not charge me to be one of 
fc Jome y znd therefore to this I fhall make no defenfe ; but onelv 
t,zs to this word, \go in ill company,) again ft Eminently Holy at; 
ned Non-conformings Minifter s ; you think ( p. 32. ) / might have 
ed to put it upon Paul, who was then a Non-conformift Minifter 
Preacher. Did I call Paul a Non-conformift Preacher? or is it 
\ who call him fo ? (1 hope you do it not to dijparage Paul, but 
credit the Non conformifts. ) Nor does the Doftor put it upon PauL 
jfcy Paul 'preached, 'tis you find fault with that word, without 
ng us what word you would have inflead of it. Which word 
you do not like, I give you leave to ufe your own, or to take 
ur choife of many more. 

But muft all be right that all our Nonconformifts fay or do ? 
d muft none of them be touched for what ever they do or fay, 
ufe St. Paul, (you fay) was a Non conformift t May no body 
to the difadvantage of Jews, Anahaptifts, Papifts, or Quakers, 
rail thefe are Non-conformift s) or fo much as name the word 
vying, becaufe (you fay) Paul was a Non-conformift? May we 
name dMonkery, Monks andRomiJh Prelates, or Popijh Rebellious 
"efts and Clergy, ( as Enq. p. 1 17, tn } \ becaufe Paul was a 
conformift f I think 'tis too great a Privilege : and too great an 
r-weening of your felves to expeft or claim it. Surely fome 
on conformifts (for there be a great many forts of them ) may be 
^td for fomewhat they do, notwithftanding Paul s being a Afa- 
irmift. 

Jfou might have called him a Conformift if you pleafed, for you 
lis He came to the Synagogue, and preached there every Sabbath- 
: which you fuppofe to comprehend and include all the reft that 
requifite to the keeping the Sabbath ( perfeSlly as to Chrift ; 
as to the Apoftle s, in their meafur e ) elje we fhould have read it 
e objeffed again ft them, which we do not find, Rep. p. 3 3. He 
ibis head at Cenchrea becaufe he had a Vow, Aft. 18. 18. He 
*fd Timothy to be circumcifed becaufe his Mother was a Jew, Aft. 
a. He would by all means keep the Feaft atjerufalem, Ad.18.z1. 
ich you take to be the Paftover, Enq. p. 1 12.) and to that pur- 
e went from Ephefus to Jerufalem, though he were thence to 
urn again. And the like for Pentecoft, if pofjible, Aft. 20. 16. 
" Aft. n. 20, 11,23,14, 16. He joins in the Ceremonies of 
_ 'cat ion 7 with/i«r men that had a Vow ; and this to vindicate 
ielf from the reproch which was raifed upon him (as a Non- 
formift ) that he taught the Jews which were among the Gentiles 

b 3 to 



list Research 



3 o Tk Chrijtwi Sdfotk Part It 

toforfake Mofes, and that they ought not to circumcife their children^ 
nor. to walk after the cuftoms : to confute which calumny, he thus 
complied, that all might know that thofe things whereof they were 
informed concerning him f touching his Non-conformity) were not A 
but that himfelf alfo walked orderly, and kept tk Law. (that is tW 
Ceremonial Law,the Law fpokenof ver. it they (the Jews) whkh\ 
believe and are all zealous of the Law.) And when he was accufed as 
faulty therein, he Hands upon hisjuftification, Chap. 14.1 1,1 1, 1 
17, \8, 19, 10. and again Chap. 16.7,8,10,1 1 . that neither againB tk 
Law ofthejfewsi nor again B the Temple, nor againB Cejar, had k 
offended in afty thing, nor could they prove the things whereof they ac 
cufed htm : And we find Lyfias, Felix, Fefius, and King Jgripjk 
acquitting him, as having done nothing worthy of death or of bonds x 
Chap. 13.13. Chap. 24.12,12. Chap.i?. 18,19. Chap. 16.31. ac- 
cording to what he tells us elfe where, that to the Jew he became as* 
Jew, and was as to the Law blamelefi: Phil. 3. «, 6. Though yet 
you own, Enq. p. 1 13, that, after the death of CkiB, he was andtt 
no obligation, to l$ep that FeaB of the Vaflwer, hut was, by his deatl 
delivered from that as well as all other Ceremonies, which are d 
nailed to his Crojl Now when he was thus compliant, though ** 
der no obligation fo to be, I fee not why yoti fliould reproach hun 
as a Non-conformiB "Preacher. You might as well call him a 
paratiB, becstufe at Ephefus A£t 19. 9. he departed, from thofe tht 
[pake evil of the way, and feparated the Z)ifciples y difputing daily $ 
the School of one Tyrannus, 



Part 11 The Chrifiian Satiatb. 3 t 

language is Rep. p, S9, 60.) But, wherein he might without fm y he 
Was content to become all things to all men, that he might fave feme ; 
he was willing, for the advantage of the Gofpel, to comply in 
glings which he thought Lawful, though not Neceffary ; as your 
Mf own p* txi, 112. ) as to his kgeping the Tafover at 
ntfalem, though under no obligation to keep it. And the like I take 
lo be, his going into the>w Synagogue on their Sabbath-day ; his 
fkcumcifing ltmothy; his Purification in the Temple; his Shaving 
Mis head at Cenchrea, and the like. And fo ( for ought appears ) as 
to the whole Mofaick Law. 



,Nor is he to be charged (for his compliance ) as teaching one 

fang and paBiJing the contrary ( as you feem to infinuate Enq, 

|73.) For he taught indeed that the Gentiles were not to be 

bought under the Toke of the Ceremonial Law ( to which before 

icy were not fubjeft ) but he doth no where teach ( that I know 

tf) that the Jews amongB the Gentiles might not obferve it, if 

fey were fo perfwaded, He bids the Gentiles, to ft and faB in the 

mrty wherewith ChriB hath made us free Gal. $ . 1 . Phil. 4. 1 . But 

m doth no where forbid the Jews to wave that privilege ( if they 

ijefe fo perfwaded ) uponajufl: occafion. And, according to this 

Stoftr/w was his Traffife alfo, in CircumcifingT/ww/^/ (becaufe 

jlis Mother was zjew,) but not Circunicifing Titus, ( who was a 

■verted Gentile. ) And, 'tis your great mifiakenot todiftinguifh 

fetween the Gentiles, and the yews among the Gentiles \ which di- 

(Hnfiion ; if well confidered, would fct you right in many points 
fame DoBnnes which werc^^ vou ftumbJe 

Vindication of St. Paul: 1 
that pafiage which doth fb 
Preachers (one or more J be- 
'twas Printed ; who' took no oflfenfe at it, nor made any ex* 
r ,.on to it. And I think it had been your wifdom (if you had 
DoRrine of the Church of England, who yet would not be though Ifct liked it ) at leail to fay nothing of it, rather than to make fo 
Non-conformifts for fo doing. Now, whether you intend it for 2 teta tan om . cry f or no thing. What is that ill fenfe of the word 
Reproach or a Commendation of Si.Paul to call him a Non-conformtiA^ whlcll ]S commonly underfeed ( you fay ) by all good and 

however, when he makes it his buGuefs to Purge himfelf of ^Mrnen, I do not know. I mean it in that fenfe in which Non* 
Imputation, and (lands upon his Juftification, that the Jews co^m^^jp wcre .wont to life it, for that of Gifted-brethren in con- 
not prove it upon him (nor can you) but that he walked orderly ^Kdiftinaion to the Preaching of Non-conformift Mmiflers : 7 Twas 
ieptthe Law, and was, as touching the rightcoujnefi which is /tf'Mfflone, as to my bufmefs, whether iWdid here fpeak, ( as you 
Law, blamelefi: You ought not to faften neon St. Taul the pleafe jo call him ) as a Non-conformtB Preacher, or as a Gifted* 

name of a Non-conformtB. Yet I do not take St. Paul to be juct nether ; for, either way, it was a Religious Exerclfe in a Chrifiian 
Conformift, as to take All as he finds it ( right or wrong) with tw'Wembly on the firB day if the week 

amongB whom he lives, or to Jml/ow all without chewing ( as yotf I l n t ^ e ttean w ^ p 0 you t j iere ^ nQt fcme m ; nent ly 



Tis true., that St. Paul did preach 
not pleafing to the unconverted 
him a Non~conformiB y fo long as 
Avhat the Mofaick Law required 

perhaps you may think fo ) that fome of our own Confortnjfb j 

may lometimes preach otherwife than according to the Ejiabli" J 




w 



^ The CfyifiUn Sabbath. Partll] 

Holy and learned Conforming Miniflers (yes, and Non-conformfti 
too ) which do obferve the Chriftian Sabbath, with whom you make 
bold all along, as worjhipping the Sun apon Sunday, (beGde manj 
other unhandfome infinuations,) when there was nooccauon lor it 
Now, if you be not angry, ( as Rep. P ; ?8. you fay I am ) or! 
your heat be a little over that we may talk calmly, I fee not wM 
/ixfe* may not here be well tranflated Preached, as our Tranlh 
tors have rendered it. That the word may be fo rendered, yd 
do not deny ; for (Enq . p. 4 ?, jy. and Repl.?. 31.) you would have 
it fo rendered Ac7. 1 7. and And why you would haven 

fo rendered there, but not here, I can guefs at no other Reafon,but 
one of thefe two ; Either becaufe our Tranflators there thave M 
/tealne A and here Preached, and therefore ( becaufe there may 
fome pleafure in contradiaing and finding fault ) yuu would have 
the contrary : Or elfe becaufe, what is there faid, was on tie 
Jewi/h Sabbath ( where you think the bigheil cxwcjjvm fit toM 
ufed,) but in this place, feeing but on the firH day of the wed, 
you think Preaching too good a word. But fince M\iy*» may be 
rendered by either word, according as may belt fuit with the Cu- 
cumllances of the place : I think our Tranflators haye with verj 
nood iudement, fo rendered it as they have done in all thole placet 
The Difcourfe of <Paul at ThefaJonica A& 17. x. and of Aquila » 
Corinth A&18. 4. doth not feem to have been a Continued Dikout* 
( fuch what we ufe to call Treaching ; ) but an Interrupted ConW 
ttnct.(Z>iahg«e-y>iik) Convincing the yew and Greeks by way * 

Arguings, Anfwers, and Replys : And while he did thus 
Via/orue-wife, it was more proper to call it Rcafomng or VifpuW 

(as M i", IT 18. 19- '9- 9 ) j!"* 811 . 11 
and therefore was well rendered Reafoned in thofe places : Butji 
the prefent place Jff. 10. 7. itwas a Continued difcourfe, not M 
guingwith them, (by way of Dialogue) but making a contmuj 
Speech to them ; which is therefore called t tip', not JWoyr, a*! 
is fitly rendered Treaching. But whether in a Continued or Inm 
rupted difcourfe, 'tis all one as to our Bufinefs; for Catecbtjing is» 
Religious Difcourfe, as well as Preaching. And you are no way ad- 
vanced in your affair, but quarrelling at the Tranflation. 

Another Exception (I mufl not call it a Cavil, though that \voij 
be frequent with you) is about the words To breakbread, wWj 
you will not allow us to-underftand of the Lords Supper. But & 
therdoth this advance your bufinefs at all ; for whether they J 
or did not celebrate the Lords Supper, 'twas at lcaft a Chrtp 

Ajfenv 



'art II. The ChiftUn Sabbath. 

Jembly ( and you affirm it fo to be Rep. M 3. ) on the firs! day of 
Wc wet This breaking of bread, you fay £n f .p. s 6^7 ( to which 
km refer Repl. p. 32. ) might be to receive the Lords Supper together, 
bs doubtlefs it was) or it might be ( you fay )for common eating or 
typing together ( as fi tends commonly do, .when a Mmjter or any fpe- 
W acquaintance intends to take a journey in the morning, to/up with 
m overnight.) But do you think this was fo? If not, to what - 
jurpofe is this objection ? That Breaking of bread is elfewhere 
fled lor the Lords Supper you do not deny, nor feem to doubt ; 
tad why not here? I do not know that the phrafe is any where 
Bed in all the New Teftament in any other fenfe. What you 
Hege of Chrifts breaking the loaves andfifhes { Mat. 14. 1 9. and Mat. 
k.36. and Mark 8. 6, 19. ) for a miraculous feeding of the multitude, 
I nothing to the purpofe ; for that's another phrafe and form of 
taech (on another occafion) from this ol breaking bread, indefi. 
itely. What you allege of Paul Ad. 1 7. 3,-. when he had thus jpoken* 
1 t0 L°ji l ' Mj Xave **** t0 Godtn prefcnee of them aU^mdwhetT 
be had broken it, he began to eat ; May be the Lords Supper, tor 
%|ght I know, with other Chriftians then in the {hip with him. 
Tis the ft me form of fpeech with that of Chrift Luk.1z.19. Mat. 
■.16. He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and 'gave them, 
'tng,T tkg t eat, &c. And why it fliould not here be underftood in 
/ fame fenfe, I fee not. If all in the ftiip were not Chriftians, 
as it s likely they were not all ) yet 1 fee not why thofe of 
*ltm which were fo, might not there celebrate the Lords Supper, 
' that occafion. For St. Paul was not athamed to own hirafelf a 
■piruW even in that company. And that of Atl. io.ii. fceins 
|ainly fo to be, They came together to break, bread ver. 7. and 
ydid breakjread before they parted, ver. 1 1 . (though interrupted 
rtnle by the fall of Eutychur.) That is, they did celebrate the 
r ds Supper ver. 11. for which they came together ver. 7. On the 
1 8 day of the week, when the difcitks came together to heak\.Bread y 
foul preached unto them being ready to depart on the morrow — and 

*ben he had Broken Bread- he departed. Why fliould we not 

wink this breaking of bread 'to be that breaking of bread for which 
^bey came together. But I prefs this no further, becaufe Repl. p. 
^M34- you feem content to admit it without farther infifting 
[PV fave onely referring to what was faid before. 

Another fcruple we have about tut ^rUnt ( for we muft difpute 
•▼ery inch of ground ) and it comes twice ; as to this place of Atl. 
^•7. and as to that of 1 CVr.io". x. whether pi* mffl*T*r do fignify 

E the 



Digitized by the ( 



Iventist Research 



?4 The Chrtfiun Sabbath. Part II. 

the fir ft day of the week: and you think much (Repl p. 34. ) that I 
fhould call it trifling; which is, you fay, a hard word. (I could have 
given it a harder word ; but know not well by whrtfofter name to 
call it than trifling. ) It may be remembred y you fay (£*?.p. ? 7-) th * 
Greek word fa Signifies Onf, and fa U is rendred (not the Firlt, 
but ) One, about an hundred times in our Tranflation of the New Tefta- 
msnt; and (p. 58.) fa <*i3£*r#r (which we uzntiztt the fir ft day of 
the week ) you render by one of the Sabbaths, and to thd fame pur- 

^°Now^tis very true that fa in Greek doth fignify One, (and it 
may be fo tranflated, for ought I know, as often as you fay. ) But 
if you were fo good a Cri tick as to correft the Tranflation, you 
might have known that fa cannot fignjfy One of the Sab* 

baths, for then it fliould have been W&gaW, becaufe oitfam is; 
the Neuter Gender. Would you think Una Sabbatorum to be good 
Latine for one of the Sabbaths? And you do not much mend it 
when you fay, One of the week meaning One day of the week \ fot 
if by one you mean Jome one, it Ihould then be frfe* no* f*<* 
iulyt. And <SWat. 1 8. 1 . it dawned or drew near »< ¥ fa» to the one y 
not to fome one day indefinitely, but to that certain which wa$ 
known by the name of fa o*iifidr<*r, and fo here ir t* pff in The 
one, &c. And what that one is, you may learn in Mar. 16. where 
what is called /ul<t c*&Mt*9 ver. r . is o*e&iia» ver. p. both fig« 
nifying the lame thing the fir ft day of the week And in Gen. 1 . f . 
where echadin the Hebrew, and fa in the Greek, do properly fig. 
nify One, yet you fcruple not to render it (again and again) tie 
evening ana the morning was the fir ft day, ( not one d#y, ) even after 
I (hewed you that both in die Hebrew and in the Greek it is One. 
For we are to underftand words in fuch a candide fenfe as in com* 
, mon-intendment may be reafonably fuppofed to be meant, not ac- 
cording to what force tuav be put upon them. As (in the inflanc* 
I gave you, how flight foe ver you make of it,) five pound ( finely 
confidered ) may fignify JSW pound of candles as well as five found of 
money ; but he that fells a horfe for five pound fliall be prelumed to 
intend it of money ( not of candles. ) And, though fa be Greek for 
One, yet when the known fenfe of fa o*W*i*v is commonly under* 
Hood to be what we call the fir ft day of the week, ( and no where 
known to be ufed in any other fenfe) 'tis captious to render 
one day of the week, thereby meaning/^ one. If I called it childs 
play ( as you obje& Reph p. 34,) it is becaufe I thought you 
liave been taught at School ( as I was ) that fa <m6&*7&f fignifics tbti 
fir ft day of the week See more to this purpofc Life. p. 30,3 1. an* | 

again 



11 The QhriflUn Sabbath 

thofe words, and this the wSti^r^i ^ d ^ bj 
but it is not a literal tranflation 0 ^ Bal «Pwffion for it) 

f /hus fupplied, fa (^ffiS^ bc E,, n ic ^ Md 2 
l** ^Utoiir" *f«r the) 

and the Propofition MbJoX 
gich is the fame in fenfe with/K «* 
Optical or ihort forms of^n^^A T/' And fllch 
P very f am i Kar ln ^ f in word * of frequent ufe) 

*4Fefi< (fubaudiTeSum \Ir "7 remember 

* here argue, that there h<» m ,nV j" WollJd y<*» have 

Winrftf, meaning a, / ?°> & frc&d « • 
Carets fFcJiminftfr Lanil ft A?*' " } C ° rn ^ : H < l ™' 

*f, ^nd T^^^^SfL ^^^^^ 
. t <MfJurj , meaning t be wharf (near t* ^v>l 2 ^ 



and you Sard S 5d ^- /# <^ 

*you wiJJ meet wnh fuch f theSu P f e I fcrl P«on ofaLetter, 



t The Chrl&hn Sabbath. par f l }' 

( as you would have it ) as £f faBe t0 fi, one hour 

Wp day of the wttk, 1 iU « 1 fc j h J you wl | 
cf/&* day, as to fay «* hour after twelve. oo r j k 

i>fcn hereafter but tb « ^ was on / ratfm , 
that**/ did ta«*/ff*Auid«^^ 

Butfince you are now content to all v ^^J'+f t jf e Veek, 
that by & «M-r»r w S'^tl ? an J nm be fo meant in this 
and in We places ^^»^h^may add, that 
place, and probably is fo me ^re |t° w y ^ do 

ft do[h not appear any f^.XjL fo meant here J 
offer any reafon or f c ^f°^\Tnot be offended with 
it is every where elfe,) I hope you win i 

me for calling it 1^ ^"""Trf 

infift upon it) ttaat^iigmfies one II wan ^ g J 

Mikhail, when u doth appea { f«h » ^"g ^ ^ ^ 

is onehour, and that it is /« ^'J^^f ^ W be thW 
• at fix a-ckJL (or any other hour of day ) ana joj J i 

Bet vou are content {En t P. ^f^i',!^^ 
promiii the matter-, you wilf allow ^J^^Z J S unM 
week, if we will admit Sunday-mght to tegm « ' ^ 1 

(Tha'tis, if it ™l r ^JTJ??&^»y*l™Wi 
the week : otherwife, it flail J^jJ^^J/^rf forbear* 
maybe fo;} ^dyouthmkto ^^iffi^rf the J 
fay that any more that ?™'fZ$W 0 1 the ^torl 
a/d continuing his ^^^^^1*5^ 4"' *S 
(.that is, on Saturday [*X/&iper (on Satur5ay-n«fl 

?aul preached to them aud talked long * «?* , J 

part/d, Mfeemnh 

that I >«W lW /A/J * fift' T^& Z orav fofl 



part IT. The Chrifi*» Stbhtth. 

of 7Ws preaching on Saturday-night, being ready to depart on * 
Sunday -morning. And you allow your felf «£rwf in /M: 

when you think // <Af J fo Jeem to them. But do you indeed 
think fo 5 Or may I return you your own words, gepl.t}.^. I 
hope you will not oblige me, or any other, to helieveyoufo think? 
• But this is to ufher in another debate, at what time the day did 
then beam ; of which conceit you feem to be very full ; that Sunday- 
nkht was what others call Saturday. night, beginning at Sun-fet on 
Saturday; and that this was the language there (at that time ) 
of St. Luke and the other facred Writers; and all this, became 
ffche morning and the evening was the fir fi day, Gen. i . y . 

Now I had (hewed it very plain, pije. *4. M\ ^g** 
Li, ,2. that as well in the New Teltament as in the Old, xhtEve- 
,Wwas always reckoned to belong to the^jy We find by 
th/flory we have of Chrilts Reftrre&on ( Mat.iS. Mar. i + Luk 
■44 Joh io.) that on thefirB day of the week, very early in the 
morning, while it was yet dark, the women came to the^epukhrej 
not oversight, ( though the Sun, at that time of the Year, did fet 
about fix a-clocl!) becaufe the Sabbath was not yet paft , and Ithey 
wttio reft on the Sabbath according to the Commandment. When 
Jhey came there, the Body was rifen, and Chnft appeared to them, 
and bid them tell it to the Difciples, which they did i after which, 
Teter and John (from the reft ) went to the Sepulchre and found it 
' to be fo, and brought fuch word back to the reft ; an I in the mean 
time he fonldios ( affrighted ) told to the high Priefc what had 
hanoened who gave them money to fay, The Difciples hadftolen 
S the Bdy while they flept and all this happened ^ the 
^Difciples went toward ^^A^^l^S^ 
the way. ) After that,they went on foot they walked) to £mmj 
Ihich yJu allow to be jlven mile and a ha% ; when they camenear 
xo Emmam, the day was far ftent, and they perfwade Chnft, 
who Sed willing 7 to go flutter) to ftay with them ; » not 
fceina convenient, unlefs upon forae great occafion, to travel ftr- 
ther that St. He there ftayed with them, continued to preach 
to hem and didwith them' celebrate the Lords Supper before 
5Lv peKeived who he was. After this, they reoirne d to Jeru. 
S another ftven mUes and half) and told this to the Difciples. 
Af fr' vhkh Chrift alio appeared to them upbraided their un- 
^cSSH ihei. FaS, preached ^gj^^^ 
his Death and Reforreawn out of Mofes, thePDlmj the 110 
nhets- save them his folemn Benediftion, conferred on ™m tM. 
&oly.G&; ordamed.thein to that office, and gave *emjg*j 



yentist Research 



3* The Chrijlitn Sabbath. Part II. 

mifllon for preaching the Gofpel, and planting the Chriftian 
Church, with Inflru.aions concerning it: Now can any man be- 
lieve, that all this could be difpatched before fix a-clock ( the 
time of Sun-fet at that feafon ) wlien yet it was fo late when they 

* i! CW j D C v t0 if T aUS as that " was inconvenient to travel fur- 
thcr t yet ail this was but the fame day in the evening, the firjl 
day of the week, J 0 h. i o. 1 9. when the doors were (hut ( near bed- 

^'K J he c da V herefo ?» which b «g a « before Sun-rifing, was 
not ended at Sun-fet, nor for a good while after. Nor did the new 

tll^V!^^ be g f " nin g of ) Evening ; efpecially ifvou 
bring back the Evening fo far as to three a-chci Rcpl p, x8. or even 
fo lynta-aay p. ap, * j * 

The fame I argued from the day of the Crucifixion. 'Twas 
Tfr,i ETOMg Wore the Crucifixion was over For 'twas after 

11 \ (i hatI V u / N ? on ) ^'P&tedelheredhmtotbe 
Jews to be crucified, and they led him away. Joh. i 9 . ,4, l6 . after 
which a CroJ was to be provided for him to. carry to Mount S 
vary (about as far from Jerusalem on the one fide ^Mount Olivet is 

off &£2 \ ° h rV e , lh l? **J w ^ about two miles 

off,) and it may be reafonably fuppofed they did not travel very 
iaif, when he was to carry the Crofi all the way, or ( when hJ 

' ■te^ tlt }^*l^P t **- When tlycime there 
rSfa TJ ? bc Z eBed > f 1 hc M enedxo ft % "hich time 
it might be about three a-clock or the ninth hour. And fome- 

^ jMj^r the ninth hour ( that is after three a-clock ) he cryed, 
Mt, Eh lammajabacbtbani; whereupon they.w^/h m, as call- 
ing for Ehas ; and the two thieves (or one of them) reviled ' him 

ItV HCy T Wt h ° W f3r 1 know not ) and fetched w/aTd 
gave him^// and vinegar to drink; after all this (howlong af- 

SLT k ?°y, no W™^^ ain ^ »P the 

ff, And c t,s J lkel y en , ou 8h { though it be not exprfflv fa& fo ) 
TiXfT?"*?"^ th *n<™»Ptbe Ghofi; &at « Chrift 
died on xUjame day fo at the fame hour, at which the fefcfirf Lamb 
was to be facnfi G ed,<i/ the going down of the Sun. Deut. 16. <5 And ' 

If J be ? llfe thc y w " m *«* when it was time to %* 
ffi*mfim theCrofi, ( that is, as you intimate RepL " X 

S£ 8 °' 26 ' ft •/ » confonam lo tha of 

7*A and Z>*tf.n. t? .) And then ( by the way) if the Thieves 

tret al7 f v r * U °, lefs ^ did reach ^ 
But, after" all this, it was later yet when Jofepb begged 

; c . his 



'a" II. fk Chriftun Sabbath. , 0 

is Body fomfikiei for 'tis exprefly faid, When Even was come 
Wph begged his body; that is after Sunfet, (for n , 
fte pains to prove from many places, That the Evening doth be- 
at Inuhjeti ) which was not granted prefently, ( for Pilate 
lubted whether he were -yet dead, and demurred till he was fa- 

o miles difiance from Jerufakm, after he was dead : ) and when 
was granted, there muft be fome time to go back again from Pi. 
te to Mount Calvary, and there to take down the body, tobuyfine 
}en to wrap it m a clean linen-cloth, to bury it in his TomB;x^ 
to Sabbath was not begun, for after this, 'tis exprefiy faid that 
»ywas the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on; Yet after this 
e women, who jaw thefepulchre and how the body was laid, return- 
home, ( from thence to ferufalem, I fuppofe ) and prepared fpkes 
d ointments (the fame night) yet rejied the Sabbath-day according 
the commandmgnt. But all this, you fay, might well be before 
'■jet. Pray, how fo ? fince Evening begins at Sun.fet, Rep. p. 30 . 
Evening was come before Jofeph begged the body of Pilate, Mat.%" t . 
ft. if. Luk-zi. How then can, all that followed, be done before 

-1 ? r ^ ym think " was > yo " ma y ccn «n u e fo to think, if 
>u pleafc ; but you mufl give me leave to think otherwife. When 
before fo much was done after the Evening was come { that is 
:r Sun-fet) and the Sabbath not yet begun ; the Sabbath did not 
'jn at Sun Jet as you would have it. 

Nor did it End at Sun-fet the next day. 1 For the Women, who 
M prepared Jpices and ointments the night before, might that 
sight, after fix a-clock, have apply ed them ; ( for the darknefi would 
Jot hinder them, it being then but jult pafl the Full Moon, if paffc, 
ad they would it feems have done it the night before, notwith- 
iranding the darknefs, but that the -Sabbath came on fo foon as not 
to afford them time enough, and they did come the next morn- 
ing while it was yet dark,) but, becaufe the Sabbath was not yet 
over, and they were to reft the Sabbath-day according to the com- 
mandment, they waited till the next morning before they could 
tome to anoint the Corps. I add alio, that if the Sabbath had 
{I jded at fix a-clock, and, the day after the Sabbath had then begun, 
parilt might have rifen that Evening, (as well as the next Mora- 
jog) for tlx third day had been then begun. Yet, on the other 
kind, (fince 'tis mauifeft that Chrift was not buried till after Sun- 
{ t ) if that Evening had not been part of the fix th day, he had not 
|«n three days and three nights, (jhat is, three «ty»«j<i ) in the 
*««•/ of the Earth, that is, in the grave. ( for-it had been but part 

of 



4D Tk CbrifiU* Sdfotk Part It j 

of the fecond and part of the third, but no part of the ftrft) Tis 
nianifeft therefore that the Evening at the end of thefixth day was 
part of the Jixth day ; and the Evening at the end of the feventh day | 
was Part of the feventh day (not as you would have it here, the firjl 
day of the week.) And confeqnently Touts preaching on thefirft day 
of the weektiU midnight ready to depar t the next morning was not 
on Saturday-night ( and he to depart on Sunday-morning, ) but it was. 
on Sunday -night and he to depart on Monday mormng. And therefore j 

is from Midnight to Midnight) is not mi/laken, as there you think. 

So AS. a 3- 3Z. The chief Captain being informed by Paul's 
Rnfman of a confpiracy to kill Paul, ver, ip, 20, 21. gave order to 
mate ready two hundred fouldiers to go to Cejareaat the Third hour of 
the night ( which certainly was after Stmfet) to bring PatUfafe H \ 
Felix the Cover nour 7 ver. 23, 24. And the fouldiers, as was com- 
manded themjook Paul and brought by night (Jd tit ™»?if, that night) 
to Jntipatrh, ver, 11 . ji. On the morrow ( rjf iwvtmv ) they ( the 
fouldiers ) left the horfemen to go with him, and returned to the Cajik } 
ver. 3 1, fo that the next morning, was ( not the fame day, but) the 
morrow after the third hour of the night foregoing. Which morrow 
did not then begin at Sun-fet, but at leaft later than the third hour 
of the night:. And you do acknowledge ( Sep. p. 29. ) that the Si- 
mons then did resign their days from Midnight to Midnirbt, which 
were therefore as you call them (wittily no doubt ) Midnigkudayr. 
And you own, that our f nglifh Day is alfo a dMidnight-day f from 
Mid-night to Midnight : and 'tis fo reputed in $ r eftmin]ferhi& 
And To you tell us Enq. p. 8;. that from Midnight to Midnight, is the 
Seining of this Kingdom. And what do you reply to all this Evtfj 
dence ? The Evening and the Morning were the firjl day muft an* 
fwer all. 

I fliewed you further, that even in the Old Tejlament it was w 
alto. The jPafchal Lamb was to be killed in the firft Month on tk 
fourteenth day in the Evenings Exod. iz. 6, 18, Levit, 13.5. Nuniy 
a8, id. jDent.16, 6. Do you think this to be that' at the e» 
of the thirteenth day? No; but that at the end of the Four- 
teenth day. And it muft be all eaten that nighty nothing of it muft 
remain till the morning 7 Exod. 1 1.18,10. that is, not after Mid-nigh^ 
for when Midnight is part, Morning begins ; What, nothing of it tm\ 
the Morning of the Fourteenth day f Surely not fo,but not till the M^ 
ing of the Fifteenth day. For I will pafs through the land of Egypt thii 
night (the night of this day, not to morrow-night, as if the nigh* 
then following were the night of another day) and will fmitrw 

W 



Part II, Tk Chrifiim SMatk 4 j 

the firjl born ver. 1 1. and it came to pafs at mid-night thai the Lord 

fmote all the firfi-born of the land of Egypt ver» 18. lo that till mid* 
night was the fourteenth day at evening, (not the fifteenth ) So 
Exod. i z. 6, 8. on the fourteenth day they fhall Kill it at evening, 
and they JbaUeat the fiejh that Night (but before Midnight) fo that 
as well the Evening as the Night (at leaft till Mid-nigbt)irt: reckon- 

I ed to the fourteenth day. Yet you would have all dilpatched before 
Sun-Jet. Again, They were to eat it with unleavened bread, and all 
leaven to be that night put away, and no leaven to be found in their 
houfes 7 \er. 8. 18, 19, 10. What,«o leaven on the fourteenth day :< 
furely there might. Seven days fhall ye eat unleavened headier. ij. 
and f even days JpaHno leaven be found in your houfes, ver. tp. And 
the firft of thofe Seven is the fifteenth oay (not the Fourteen th,) 
therefore on the fourteenth day they might have Leaven ; bur 
from the fourteenth day at Even they might not ; therefore the 
fourteenth day at Even was the end ofi\\z Fourteenth day ( not the 
beginning of it, and therefore not at the end of the Thirteenth 
day ) and this evening continued till mid-night, therefore fo long 
continued the Fourteenth day* Now from the fourteenth day at e- 
veningy (that is, from the end of that Evening,) till the one and 
twentieth day at evening, (that is, till the end of this Evening,) 

ye fhall eat unleavened bread; feven days /hall no leaven be found m 

your houfes ; ver 18, ip. of which feven days, the fifteenth is the 
$rft. So Levit. 1 3 ,3 2; From even to even, I take to be from the end 

iof one Evening to the end of the next, with which you are not 
pleafed, Sep. p. But (you fay Sep. p. 30.) The Evening does begin 

k at Sun Jet ( and take pains to prove it ; ) True ; But it doth not end 
at Sun-fet: It continues till Mid- night. And from the end of one 

kvening, to the end of the next, is from Mid-night to Mid-night. 
And I have beSn told ( by Men of your Profeflion) that from the 
day of the date hereof is from the End of that day \ that is, from 
the Mid-night following. { And, you know, fome great Cafes have 
turn'd upon this point. ) And in what ycucite, Em. p. 117, (which 
place I doubt yon raif ttndcrflood ) about the Obfervation of the 
rafeba (that is Eafter-day ) from the Fourteenth of the Moon to the 

^Twenty firjl; the meaning is not that the Pafcha did all that while 

[continue, but that thefe were the Smites Tafchales or termini Taf 
ehales ( as they are wont to be called ) within which the Tafcha ww 
to be kept ; that is, From the end of the fourteenth day, to the end 

> *f the one and twentieth. Not fo foon as the Fourteenth day, nor 
kter than the one and twentieth, but on that Lords-day (which 
could be but one ) which did fall within thefe limits. Which is 

F the 



tist Research 



42 The ChrifliM Sdfatk Part II, 

the known meaning of tbofe words. So Levtt. ij. f, 6. The four* 
teenth day of the fifji month at Even, is the Lords 9afs-over 7 and on 
the fifteenth day is the feafi of unleavened bread; (even days ye muji 
eat unleavened bread. And Numb %8. i6 } 17. The fourteenth day of 
the firjl month is the Tafs-wer of the Lord; and in the fifteenth day ts 
the feafi ; feven days pall unleavened head be eaten. So Num. 33,3. 
They departed from Ramefes in the fit ft month^ on the fifteenth day of 
the firji months on the morrow after the Pafs-over ; Now the Lords 
Pafs-over ( wherein he flew the Egyptians and pafjedover the 
Israelites) was about midnight on the fourteenth day at even; and 
prefently upon it (before the morning light) the Ifraelires were 
fent out on the fifteenth day, // came to pafs at Midnight the Lord 
fmote all the jirft-born, — and Pharaoh rye up in the Nighty — md 
called jor Mofes and Aaron by Night } and [aid Rife up y getje forth, — 
jfnd the Egyptians were urgent upon the people that they might fend 
them out of the land in Ha/i, — and the children of Jfrael travelled 
for Ramefes to Succoth y &c, Exod. t%. ip, 30, 31, 37. So that jull 
after midnight was the Morrow after what was jujl before midnight. 
We have found therefore a mid-nightMy (as you call it) even in 
the Old TeftamenL And Deut. 16, 6, Thou Jbalt facrifice the Pajs. 
over at even, at the going down of the Sun^ at the feafon that thou 
cameji fo thout ofEgypt 7 (which was, midnight^ Mxod.it, 4, Exod* 
ii-ii,) So that from Sun-fet to Midnight is the time within which 
rhe Tafs-over was to be Killed,md Ro^ed y mA Eaten^ni no part of 
it to remain till morning } (that is not after mid nigh t ? for then morn- 
ing begins ;) and what follows is the morrow after, and a new day : 
That was the Fourteenth, This is the Fifteenth- 

Bat in Exod. j%. 6. they fhall kill the Pafs-over in the evening, 
at between the two evenings ; you take the firjl of theft evenings to 
begin either at om three a-clock in the afternoon^ ot prefently after 
JllidJay, between which mdSmfet (you fay) there might be time 
enough to kill and drefs it without running up the time to midmghU 
I will not here prefs you with what you take pains to prove Repfy^ 
p, 2.9,30. that the evening begins at Sun fet, when the evening comes, 
is j when the Sun isdown y p. 30. { though I fhould think the begin- 
ning of the ^ftf/^fhouldbe the fir/1 evening ,not the laffc) But I dc- 
fire you to confult 2)eut. 16, 6, where you will find it was to be 
killed j not at three a-clock in the afternoon^ nor prefently after mid-day r 
but at the going down of the Sun, at the feafon that thou cameji out of 
Egypt. Now, if it m«ft be killed at the going down of the Sun, where 
fhall we find time to k}Uit y drefs it, rcaft it and eat it, without run- 
ning up the time beyond Sun-fet? Whether //// mid-night ornois 

not 



Digitized by the Cej 



Part II. Tht Chripan Sabbath. 4? 

Zs Jr ?. Xn f I Tr M t T° l b fil^nth day, ( whereas the 
K 18 al , t0 be ^tched' on the fourteenth^y ; and the fif- 

run it up beyond Sun-fet, the next words tell you, at the feafon that 
li?cTf? !Cf ^ P t> Which ^^miLglt: fo tffihtk 
.f^j n? l U V h ^ hetmen the tm> evenings, hbemeen Sun-fet 

SSh 11 P ? 4*™^ - hat tlU the ^of^LotdsTafs-over 

TA^ Zi 9 \ 3S r He mSrn ? ahcr - The/ZWj day therefore 

JhhL wTS I hen , llC V°« ld X'M the Oblervation If the 
Kfore 1C ? had b "n Io "S! nterimited ( dunn 8 theCapttvity^nd 

fhTJ^ft mh I g<m ^ be ^^efore the Sabbath, /commanded 
if IT &C -^ 0t at Sm J' et ' bm when the Han ta 
It ' Lr h "I^i 1 } 1 } a ,S°od while after Sun-fet, and vet even 
tfcf t f ° r 'l heSdh J h - Tb < Sabbath was not yet begun, but 
the Gates (hut, by way of prevention, when it grew toward tilt or- 

IZ SfS^l I & 10 80 £ and out ; y« even then they were 
Si ^ U[ i on occafion ' lhe y mi S ht be °pened to let m 
0 dinary palTengers, (though not for thofe who brought merchan- 

l^°Ji ° n , thC S^-ty*) »« d for that purpose left ikfir- 
**ts at the gates, tbttthtre jbmld no Burden be brmght m. 

nhJ?r«r 7?T ! " all , i ;" fon » y° u ought to have given fometolc 
able anfwer to theft allegations, or elfe not tell us Rep. that 

Xtply. Thefe allegations feem to me (and Ifuppole will fo to the 

iS ! Tf? WCak i s , 10 be fli S hted - And ti]1 > ou have anfwered 
«em, 1 ihall not eafily believe, that Pauls preaching to them at 
tms m the firft day of the week, and continuing his fpeech till 
18 to he underftood of Saturday night he being to depart 
°n Sunday morning. ° r 

J^txa^ ^hole/trefs is laid upon The Evening and Morning 
*<>e the fiyfi day, we'll confider that a while. 

vlZ l^i T K } T h r\ hl callin 8 " tbe Fir fi though vou 
now that both^WintheHebrew,and F ( a in theGreek,dofignify 
tt h-nglilh, (not the FtrH.) For though One while it is alone 

F a (and 



... The Chrijlian Sabbath. Part II. 

• and fo confidered ) be, in propriety of fpeech, no more tbefirfl ? than 
the k(l, ( tor fir/i is a Relative word, and there can be no 
™khout CbwkJ yet if what was then but 0*r, be confidered 
wi hTfoeaTo what then «« to be, and fince to* been, it may fo 
confide e P d) be called the Firji. Nor would I have quarelled wi h 
vo« if mftead of >/?) you had called it One day (as it ,s both m 
Ihe Hebrew and in the Greek ) provided, by day, you do not 
mean (indefinitely \ tome one day ( as if inflead of ^ « had been 
Sf ^bitOne^ day; that day which, whea there 
Should be another, will become the Fir* ( as had been in tfe time 
when <W Wrote, though not on the day whereof he Spake;) 
fo "hSryon cal'l it ol day (as then it was) or the 
(as it was to be when there came a Second) is all one to me, ior tis 

tU &3tf^&i» «br '« (« ™ d0) f e 

£ W /tojfcr** *m thefrjl day, though you know tha 
S the Original it 1S no more but there IVas Evening and theieWas 
jZmnt hefrji day, and it is fo rendered in other Tranuations . 
But I would ha"ve confider, that there can be no more cone In- 
ded from it ( however we tranfiatc it ) than if it were fo tranfiated 

I as it is in the Original. u* f*,A thne 

If I then argue ( at the rate you do ) that though it be laid tbeie 
ws Evening and there vas Morning the Fir f dap and t^uasevc- 
ning and tkere was morning the Sixthday yet it w . not faid there 
was Evening and there was Morning the Seventh day, (we do no 
fo« nor isitfo^/^«;)and it you replv ( which vou will 
not allow me to do) m may Aeafonablvfumfe that it was ,(o on h 
Seventh day and every day fince; and I lhould rejoin to you (a 
vou do Rel p. 17.) this « but Suppo ed not m the Word vhfil 




call it Trifling, or Shifting, ( or Cavtlhng, if Y^u pleafe, or by fo^ 
other harder name-.) For I do think, there ^hcfeafintoM^ 



w 



.udec what is moft likely tobe true, of what ts not mitten AnM 
S3 you do allow vou r Of* liberty ( though pu wiU not* 
low nus) to /if/^/cr many things wh "\ a ^ 
great many ot your Arguments begin with / thiniznd tftffl 
But though I do not think fit to take this ad van tage, )CtW 
Jmfmrtb,* learned No* Conform*/} (for whofe Authority you ^ 



t II. The ChriftUn Sabbath. 45 

rhaps therefore have the more reverence) in his Tranflation of 
fve Books of dflfofes, thinks fit to take notice of this difference 
»ie feventb day, from the fix fore going (as if, in his judgment, 
1 might not fafely argue from thofe to tbis y ) in his Annotations 
•thofe words he Ucffcd it Gen. i. 3. (as a day of delight and fea/i- 
) wherefore ( faith he ) this day is not dejeribed by Evening and 
wing, as were the other fix ', which conjifted of light and darknefs ; 
this allT>ay (or Light) figuring out our perpetual Joys. How far 
Jauthority of this eminently Holy and Learned Non>ConformiB y 
Jjfoeak in your own Language ( for fo I take him to have been a 
mod wan, and a learned man, notwithftanding his Non-conformity,) 
U fway with you, I cannot tell ; but, on-whatever time the 0- 
days did begin, he feems to begin the f event b day with Light, 
not at Sun-fet when Night was coming-on. 
Yet I (hall allow you (though it be not Written ) that there was 
1 the Seventh day (taking-it> the whole 24 hours) Darknefs as 
jell as Light. 

But withal, when God is faid to Reji on the feventh day, or (as 
pleafe to render it ) to Sabbatize on the leventh day ; this I 
ppofe, you would have to be underftood not barely of a Negative 
JU ; that is, noUCreating; (for then he did as much Reft or Sab- 
itize on the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth day, and fo forward \ ) but 
include fomewhat Tofitive (what ever that were) on this day 
irformed : And accordingly Man* Celebration of a Sabbath ; 
like manner : Elfe to Jleep or be idle all the day, would be a fuffi- 
int Sanaification of the Sabbath ; which I think you will not 
low. Now, at what Time of the Seventh day, God did thus Blcfs 
id San&ify it, by fuch To fit he San&ification, we do no more 
' &w, than at what time of the Firft day he faid Let there be Light; 
at what time of the Fourth day he made the Sun, So that we 
J yet in the dark, ( according to this rule) at what time of the 
ay this Holy Reft doth begin, if we mutt begin our Sabbath (as 
fou would have it) juft at fuch time of the day as God began his. 

But I would then tell you, that it is not Written, [nor do we 
Read \ in the Word, that the Seventh day. (nor indeed any other day) 
doth begin at Sun fet. I am fure the Firft day d\d not, nor the 
cond, nor the Third, nor (I think) the Fourth; nor can you fhew 
(in Scripture ) that ever any day did fo begin. I am fure, at the 
Pafs-over, that the Fourteenth day did End at (or verj near) ciWtf- 
night, and the Fifteenth day did then begin; not at Sun-fet, And 
the Sixth day (on which Chrift was Crucified) did not End at Sun- 
but a great while after. And the Frrftd^ (on which Chnit 
0 rofe ) 



4* The ChriftUn Sdbatk Part II 

rofe) did neither Begin, nor End, at Sun-fet And when you cat 
(hew me, fo plainly, that ever any day ( in Scripture ) did (o Begin 
or End, it will then be time to give you a farther Anfwer. 

But when you tell us Rep, p. tfp. that Evening and xffiorning dti 
conftitute and make up every day in the wtekj pray what do you 
think of Noon ? was that no part of the day? or, didit continw 



tmnK ol mon? was tftat no part or the day* 1 or, did it continue Tj V 1 tu oc 8 m wnen votis did t Uecanfe (p. <5 

morning xftSunfet? Pray {hew me fonie /PWwhere it hfomii ff , 9*$*** : And therefore ym would not have all parts if 
ten or where I may Read it ; or mull we take your fVord for it f That 7? tyedupto tie precije. moment of Gods Refting. And a<w 

f (Mnmine tacrine Parln tmk 'tfa it it vPt An*L I I . l^t ^ no place in tie IVard mh/>r* it i? H>iJ *k~* 



m tt ii^vn, ; *uu i gum uiai, iiicjc waj> mrf&ejs ana enen 
was the firft day (and fo of the reft) but I do not grant thai r 
the fkfi day did hegin at Sun fet. You'll fay perhaps that 'Darkwfi J** w ff re u . ts f md fa 
was before Light, True - CJXarkmejk was upon the face of tie de& J™ tc 1 " s indeed > ^ P- <5?> <>B, ( as a Reply to one of my Ex- 
beforeGod faid Let there be Light, Gen. i. 2, j .) But fo it might ms > > ihn ™f ^yfuppo/e tie Sun when jet in the firmament, 
be though the day began at Midnight. Can you tell ine flow ^fc^^'Tv ™ e ft™ ard romd ^ti daily, as it fill deth. 
it was dark, before God faid Let there be Light? Was it juS 
Twelve hours? neither more nor lefs? as it ought to be at thfi 
Vernal Equinox (where you fet up your Scheme Rep.-p t <j% f 7 j,} $ 
the day begin at Suffer. Pray Ihew me where I fhall find thaij 
Yet this you muft (hew, before you can thence prove, that the Fm 
day did begin at Sun-fet, or juft twelve hours before it be light. Is! 
might be Six hours, or not fo much, for ought you or I do know. 



II. The ChrijiUn Sdbtth. 

Wans Reft begin when Gods did ? Becaoft (p. 6 9 .) ti/swere to 



toM,)^das thepo/tmty of Adam (andfo of Noah ) travelled 
k^trf, North or South, (not weft- ward onely,) by degrees the 
Wwas cver/pread ( very good ; ) and into whatever country they 
1 % tfc &w Mj J* every day of the week began ( that is, 
tell us ft) andfo on to this day; and (as p. 7 n) in all places of the 
f <\ as the Sun fits everywhere, fo mery where the Sabbath-day 
y other day of tie week doth there begin andend^ notwith- 
n 5 the Mptence of iours and minutes from the Jetting of the 




fuppofe this alfc ( that it was dark for juft" v 
before God faid Let there be Light) what then? Therefore, y* P J md **& m u ^konfrom Jerufalem (weft- ward J and follow the 
fay, The feventh day at the creation did begin as tie three ftjlJ^W^i * £ ff S nmd * tiU il ccma <& mt ** ferufalem 

and the other week-days did, that is in the evening at or about fu> ft F) and ke ^P P acc Wlth ll > m J mn imagination all the way, or 
and lofted 14 hours, from evening to evening, Rep. ^68. (But, that |L ° 7 n as ^ y ou dld ?) fame ^ a y (\o\\ tell us ) begins at Rome, 
the three pjl days did begin at or about Sun fet (when as yet there 7*' s l * te r than ** Inufalem; at London, j hours and twelve mi- 
was no Sun ) feems to me new doftrine. ) And Rep, 0^3. .it fectiS J/ f a/ ^ w 8 hours ; and [jltll following the Sun from 

(to you) demonftrabk, that every day of the wee^ began every wher* Y L to * a P an y) u J e * J ^ffapan 1 7 hours later than atjerufalem ; 
in tie evening round the world as the Sun did jet. But ftay a while m ^ oms mm* from Japan to Jerufalem again; 17 and 7 being 
Was there not a moment when Gods Reft did begin Gen. 2. x? And \tjj JS > r when y ou come hstck 10 Jtrujalcm, it will be ftiU 
if Gods Reft were to be man's Rule , was not the Sabbath then to {Jot the Sun hath not fet, to you, all the way, who 

begin ? But, at whatever moment that was, ' 
fet in one place, it was Sun rifing at another, 
and at a Fourth tflidmght. (For furdy it v. 

fame ^llntheftrjidayi^ 

r> tnough not to you who travelled with it. ) And, if you then 

continue 




, Digitized by the C 



itist Research 



4 g The Chrifli** Sabhtk Part J 

continue there, yourjeventb day muft be thenceforth concurred 
with ibeir firft day : Wltich is the Expedient I offered you. Art 
'tis iult the fame cafe with that of Sir Francis Draft s loojwg *M 
by tailing round the Earth ; fave that he loft the day by fare* 
and vou all at once (becaufe your Imagination keeps pace with* 
Sun/ but he could not fail fb fall ) And though this day ( by J 
means) become longer by z + bwrs than another day ; this a tcj 
not the cafe at all according to your doflrme j for to you tell J 
Enq p. 39. One long day m Jojhuatis time, and another m HezeM 
time, or the variety of the times of the Stinsfetting in different ■ 
mates does no way difturb, for that a day longer or fkorter than anoM 
by Come hours is (till a day, and but a day : And fo here, £ef>. p. H 
the two Jong days in Jofhuatis and Hezeki*Vs time ma ft no alteram 
And if it be loft by parcels, {which is the cafe or Sit-Frm 
Drake ) 'tis the fame thing, for he will certainly have one Sua-] 
fewer than thofe he left behind, and fo ( it at ev^ry Sun-fct whcJ 
ever you are, without con fide ring what day it is at Taradije or j 
rufalem, mult begin a new day, and not till then, which is yffl 
doftrine, ) bis Seventh day ( when he comes round ) will be conctf 
rent with their firft day who ftayd behind, and lb for ever altf 
which is the Expedient I ofFered you. Again, what you tea* 
Repl p. 66. that Cbrijitans in Turky mujt top this Sabbath on nym 
This will be unavoidably fo, by your doftrine, to thole 
(hall travel Eajiward to Japan or the EaftJndies, and come ffl 
by thcStreights of ^Magellan; for, as the other loofe a day, ^ 
will**/ a day ; and fince you allow that the potency of ^* J 
Noah may travel Weftwardw well as Eajiward round the Woj 
Their Saturday who thus travel Eajiward will (when theycoj 
round ) be coincident with the Fryday of thofe who flay d bcW 
according to your Scheme. , : V J i I 

In the mean time ; The firft day did certainly hegm at the m 
moment as to all the World; (the firft moment wherein W 
began to create. ) And if it began at once for all the WorW 
mult (after 14 hours according to your reckoning Rep. p.» 
End at once for all the World, And fo the ftcond, third, flj 
day accordingly, Now if the fixth day do at once end aU 
World over, but the feveuth day not then begin (but fome m 
after, be it 10, u, or 13 hours, according to your Scheme PA 
73.) then (as you argue p. 68.) *e loofe fo many hours; wbicbft 
no part of the fixth day y nor ( to fucb ) anf part of the feventh l 
would ceafe ( to them )to be any part of the week. How you wiIM 
fwer your own Argument I cannot tell : it fceras to me feme*' 
difficult. 



hit IL 



the ChrifiiMn Sabhtk 



49 



If, to avoid this, you will fay { and 'tis the faireft yon can offer* 
may perhaps be true) that, When God faid, Let there be 
bt } it was not prefentJy light all the World over ; but rather 
t God did then create a B*df of Light {ox z Light fome Body ) 
hich did move round the Earth (as now the Sun Joth,) and was 
be fecn fucceffively at fevcral places 7 one ) two,ten,twelve or twen- 
hours after the dajicnels firft began : If fo ; this deftroys your firft 
jpothefis, that the Firft day did begin every where juft twelve 
urs before it began to be light, that is, (as you phraf'e it) juft at 
fet, ( before there was a Sun.) 
But pray Sir confider, How unfafe arguing it is, to catch at * 
tion, or take up a fanfy, and then run away with it, as if all 
ere fafe, becaufe you fo fanfy ; and force all other places ( though 
ver fo contrary) to comply with this Fanfy. All you have 
re to lay hold 01,1s no more but thisXhere was Evening and there 
j Morning the ftrjl day, that is, there was Darknefs and there 
as Light the firft day ■ and Darfyefi was before Light. Whencfc 
ou conclude therefore the firft day did begin at Sun-Jet, Might 
J* all this be if it begin at Midnight ( or at any ocher dark hour) 
well as at Sun-fet ? or ( for fo 1 am willing to underftand you, 
t it may look like fenfe,) juft twelve hours ( every where ) he- 
re it { there ) began to be light ? I fhould think that you might 
well conclude (from your premiflcs) that the day is to begin 
Norn. For, that Morning may continue till Noon } I can allow 
u ( though not till Sun-fet \ ) and you can allow ( to ferve a turn) 
epl p. that Evening may begin prefently after Mid day, { rather 
en the Pafs-over fhould not be all difpatctTd by Sun-fet;) And 
n from the beginning of Evening to the end of Morning muft {by 
. f s Account ) be from Noon to Noon. 

Nor is any ftrefs to be laid upon the order of words, (that Eve- 
is named before Morning,or Night before Day ; ) for both are 
promifcuoufly in Scripture, fometime Night before Day, and 

etime Day before Night. Tfali, 1, i. Blefjedis the man - 

e delight is in the Law of the Lord^and he meditateth therein Day 
Night ; and in many other places* And if you look no fur- 
r than the Fmrth day; Gen, 1 , God faid 7 Let there be lights in 

Firmament to divide the day from the night. { or between the 

and between the night f ) ver.14. dnd GoJ made two great light s f 
greater light to rule the 2)ay, and the kjjer light to rule the Night, 

i r 1 6, to rule over the Say and over the Night } and to divide 

i Light from the 7)arknefi } ver. 18. (There, we have Day before 
ight, and Light before Darknefs.) So in Exod. xp, 38,39. Ntw 

G this 



tist Research 



Tk Chrifttti Sdbatk Part It 

this is that which thou /halt offer upon the altar , two lambs of tht 
firft fear, day by day, continually, tht one lamb thou /halt offer in tie? 
Morning, and the other lamb thou Jhalt offer at Even, And in like 
manner Numb. i8. a, 4- This is the offering made by fire which yt 
jhall offer unto the Utd ; two lambs of the firft year without jpit 
day by day for a continual burnt-offering : the one lamb Jhalt thou ojfet 
hi the Morning) and the other lamb paftthou offer at Even : which foft 
the Sabbath Jay was to he doubled, ver.p. to- Where you fee that 
( in both places ) the Morning is put before the Evening. Though 
you are pleas'd (as to both places) to invert the order, Er/f. p. U 
(but whether or no it were an Artifice 1 cannot tell ) Their daily 
precije tiries, of Evening and Morning worjhip (fay you) / kftov 
not, but mely Evening and Morning, txod. xp, 35, 41, 4 l > 43? 45V 
Numb. 1%. 4, 8. ( Where alfo you put Evening and ^Morning in a 
different charafter, as more remarkable. ) And fo p. 83. Evtnty 
and Morning wotjhip, —which Evening and Morning worfhip—n 
not to be intermitted upon the Sabbath-day: and for this feeNuni* 
28. 3,4, 8,y. You may obferve alfo that ( even for the Sabbath) 
the Evening Sacrifice is in the end of the day {after the Morning 
Sacrifice,} not over-night (in the Evening before, ) fo that the 
Morning of the Sabbath was before the Evening of the Sabbath. I 
forbear to cite other places where Morning is put before Evening! 
But thefe two I thought fit to mention to RcBify your Irmrit% 
the order of the Words ; putting the Evening and Morning worftif 
inftead of Morning and Evenings as it is in the Texts you cite- 

And 'tis very weak to lay any ftrength meerly on the order of 
words in fuch a cafe. In Gen. i. 4, Thefe are the generations of tbt 
Heavens and of the Earth when they were created, m the day that tk 
Lord made the Earth and the Heavens: Which of thefe {hall VC 
here conclude to be firft ma^e ? 

I hive now done with this Digreffion (about what time the datf 
is to begin); which you put us upon, hoping thereby to Ihift ol 
this place of AB. xo. *j. from Sunday to Saturday night. 

A like place I faid Difc. p. 38. ) is that of 1 Cor. 16. 1,2. But vihd 
likenefs there is between thefe places you cannot fee Rep], p. 37. lie 
fhew you. I had there faid, that in Jomt places, though fingle /*' 
fiances Jhere is intimation of a frequent ufage ; as AB. 20. 7. and I 
like place is that of 1 Cor. i'<5. This likenefs there is. That fuck 
intim ttion was in the former place, I had fliewed before. And it 
is fo here, Now concerning the CoSeBionfor the Saints, as T have IK 
::en order in the Churches of Galatia, evenfo do ye : Upon the p ft day op 



rtll The Chrifiun SaUstk $j 

week, let every me of you lay by him in fiore as God hath pro, 
yd htm ; that there be no gathering when I come. Where it 
nly appears,that/& >fojl day of the wr£,was wontto be obferved 
r r in the Cbmxbes of Galatia, and at Corinth. This the Apollle 
ofetb, when he dire&s what he would have done on thofe 
; which is a work of charity, proper for fuch a day. Here 
W0*t*f troubles you again, whether it may not be any day of 
week as well as the firft day of the week, I told you then T)ifc. 
p. I did believe, your ] elf thought it to be the Firfi day. It is 
pld* <n$U™* ( on that day which is me day after the Sabbath. ) 
d younowconfefs^/.p.28. Tou think that m the NewTeftament 
d where elfe doth it not ? ) it is Generally meant the Firft day; 
the Firfl dy is Certainly meant in fome places. And this con* 
loft fhall ferve my turn, till you can fhew fome place (either 
toe New Teftament or clfe-where) in which it figniftes other- 
or, whv it {hould not here fo fignify as every where elfe it 
. You then intimate E nq t p. ^8. and again Jtep. pt<|*j as if it 
ht be meant of a yearly ColleBion, becaufe that ( in purfuance 
uppofe of this direction ) it is faid in the fecond Epiffle, % Cor. 
to. They had begun before, not onely to do, but to be' forward, a 
ago; And 1 Cor, 9. 1, i. / boafied of you to them of Macedonia 
Achaia (where Corinth flood) was ready a year ago. But why 
this be a yearly colle&ion rather than a weekly collection ? 
it they not, a year ago, begin and hz forward in fuch weekly 
..eftions ? Yet you do confefs £»?.p.y8. that, of yearly colleBions, 
hing that you know is there exprefiy written. BiK,whether Week- 
or Annual, if it were to be done on the firft day of the week, 'tis 
ifeft that the firft day of the weej^ was then obferved. 
ut further to fatisfy you that it is not an Annual, but a Weekly 
Jeflion; you may confider the words uU* ctt^ rf w, juft 
the fame form with that AB. 2. 45. they continued in the temple 
'iju*^ 1 doyly } every day 7 or day by day; and breaking bread 
r (domefticatim) from houfe tohouje; and ver. 4-7. and the Lord 
4 to the Church «f«e^ dayfy, fuch as /hould be faved. And 
to the fame purpofe AB. f. 42. m*tlw n ipti&t t? W Uf& dayly in 
Temple, ^ mo* and in every houfe, they ceafed not to teach 
Breach fetus Chrift. And in the Lord* Prayer Luk 11,3. Give 
our dayly bread &f hut&v day by day : And AB. 13. 27. the 
|r of the Prophets which 'are read ^ mSCam every Sabbath* 
; and AB. 14. 23. they ordained elders nkY iMx.htt<r<&t in every 
xb; AB. if* 21 . Mofes of old hath them that preach him 
every City, being read in the Jynagoguts *p *h ed£C*nr every Sab- 

G i * bath- 



p The ChiftiM SMtih. ^rtlL 

bath Jay; and AB. n il- A« W&> *$Fi d %l 
and AB. i8, 4. ^ *fi every fabbatb ; and ^B- i»- 9*/!/' 

j* ^/fW 0/ «w 7>r«w« *V or day by dp 

Ythe lame with '«« Jptpr ^ 17. i>) and frf. 1. *r** 
W&rj # Tfau» ineveifcity: So here, # pUv ^C«t«, lstftfttiy 
jfr/f^ of /if (week by week.) Would you have it to be re* 
liered, on every One day of tie week? And if u were to be clone 
(on that day) week by meek, then was this firft day^ not oaely * 
ferved, but wnt to be obferved. Which {hews this ( as was noted 
before) not oncly to be a /ingle precedent, but a wonted cuftomt; 
loth in the Church of Coring and thofe ifl Galatta. 

You add Rep p. I f «*W obferved, and wont to be obferved, 
( which you do not deny, though you are loth to grant it,) yet it a 
not faid to be obferved as a Sabbath, or as a week]/ day of hok Refi 
But if hence it appear that it was vmt to be obferved, ( which is noi 
denyed,)'^ it was obferved, will appear elfewhere, in rebgm 
exercifes, of which a charitable coHeBion for the Saints [ m want) 
is one. As they had, before, been forward; fo he doth here e* 
liort them (a. Or- 9. ) to Continue, and to do it Bountifully ; W 
'twas a thing to be done more thaa once ; and that firfi day mor« 
than Once to be celebrated. 

But it conld not {you'fey) be a Sabbath or mc%reft x butW 
quite contrary, for it mcludes cafting up their account s 7 telling tm\ 
rnony, reckoning their Stock &c* elfe how can they difcreetly lay aJM 
As God hath profpered them I p, $ 9- Rep. p. J7- Now becauM 
I am here blamed for calling this a Wife Objeffion, I wiU callitiJ 
no more, But you may find it fully anfwered Difc. p. (thoujffl 
you pleafe to take no notice of it ) And that the fame objection w 
as well againft 7}eut. \6ao, where m the Feafi ofTentccofl (whiffl 
your fclf callaSabbath) they are to bring a tribute ofajrte-wffjm 

ing according as the lord thy God hath blejed thee. Unit tn 

therefore on that day caft up their accounts f tell their money , oft, 
becaufe they were to offer according as the Lord had blejed tbm 
I think nor; no more than upon a Sabbath-day, For, that day was 
be obferved as fuch, Levit. 23, %t. Te fball proclaim on the felfp 
day that it maybe a Holy Convocation untoyouye JhaS do nafervile W 
therein: And it is a branch of the general order, ver. 2* and vet. k 
concerning all the Feaft s there named, that the/ were tobeprocw 
ed to be Holy* Convocations ; Of which the Sabbath is one ver. J*' 
this of Pentecoft another, ver. ij, If it were not then 

continent with the (Sabbatical) Feaft of Pentecoft, to offer ac0 
ingastk Lord hadblejedthmi why Ibould it be thought tm 



partlL TkChrifian Sabbatk 543 

tent with a Religious Obfervance, of the Firjl day of the Week^ 
it Corinth or in Galatia, to Jay by as God hath profpered them ; with. 
Hit cafting up their account s^ telling their mony, examining their ftock 7 
)mputwg their expenfes &c? All which may as well be done before 
[if need be ) in the one cafe as in the other. As to what you fay, 
this laying by him in ftore might be done when they were af under and 
at home, and not a publick colle&ion. Be it fo ; but if this be re- 
jpm mended to be done cn the Firjl day of the mek 7 { whether pub- 
Lck or private) it is a fign the day however was obferved^ and pie- 
^ umed to be fo. But you might have feen ver. i- it was a CoHeBiort 
for the Saints (not a private laying afidc) and ver. %. that there be 
) Gatherings when I come y which yet mull have been if (before) 
ley onely laid aGdc in private. 

I have now (hewed you Ftve precedentS| of the Firft day of the 
fek then obferved ; and fomeof them are more than fmgle prece- 
dents : (and cleared them from all your Objeftions.) Tne firft is 
tat of Chriji himfclf, with the two 2)ifciples at Emmaus, and then 
ith the Eleven at jferufalem, on the day of his RefmreBion ; and a 
great deal of ferious bulinefs there difpatched. A fecond, of CbriJt 
alfo with his 2>ifciples } on the fame day the next week, and in like 
manner imployed. A third, on the day of TentecoJ y in the Mi- 
raculous Effujton of the Holy-Ghoft ; and Teteth preaching, to a 
-eat Ajemblyj converting three thoufand Souls, A fourth is that 
" Taul at Troajy A£b 20. Preaching to a large congregation, and 
lebrating the Lords Supper 7 on the firfi day of the week A fifth is 
lat of 1 Cor. 16. where 7aul (prefuming or taking for granted 
that fuch were) directs farther, what (amongH other things ) he 
|ould have to be done at thofe Meetings, on that day. But if, after 
ill this, yon cannot believe (or will not believe) that the jir/i day 
\f the week, was generally obferved, or wont to be obferved y or at all 
>tbferved« ( as you tell us Rej>, p. 38. ) I cannot help it. If ydu could 
thew but half fo much evidence (or even lefs than fo\ from matter 
Jf fa#, for Mans obferving the Seventh-day-fabbatk ( after God's 
\fefling Gen. %,) before that of Exod. 16, (alter Jfraeh coming out 
Egypt,) for more than two thoufand and five hundred years : you 
Would think that matter of faff to be well^proved. 

If the Reader lhall think it irkfome, that I am put upon difpu- 
ting fo many Little things (I muft not call them Trifles) I cannot 
kip it : For, how little foever they are, you think them to te 
reat matters* 

A Sixth 



54 The Chriftan Sdfotk Part II 

A Sixth precedent is that Rev. i. to. f was in the Spirit on the 
Lords day. Where though we have it by a new Name, n is the fame 

daymih what is otherwife called ihtfrft day of the fFeeks and 
hath always been fo reputed. 

This you do not deny to be a good Precedent, if this Lords dap 
were the firjl day of the Week 

Now that it was fo, (not, as you would have it, the Seventh-day- 
Sabbath,) I proved to you fo fully, Difc. 43,^,4y ? ^47,4#,49,j'o* 
as would fetisfy any perfon not flrongly pre-ingaged. That it was 
the proper name of a day (by which it then tvas known) you grant 
Rep. 1 9. And that it was not the S&venth-dayfabbuth ( but fome day 
contradiftinguifhed from it) feems plain, elfe be'tsronld have called 
it the fabbath (the molt known name or that day if there wcte no 
other Sabbath) / was in the spirit on the Sabbath day, Ignatius who 
was a Dijaple of St, John (and fa molt likely to know his meaning) 
who wrote foon after (it not before ) St. John wrote the Revel£ 
thus ( for he died within ten years after it) tells us it was the firft 
day t in contradiftin&ion to the Jewifh Sabbath {Hon ampMs Sabba* 
tizantesjedfecwdumftominicamviventes, [feu vitam agentes,)/** qua 
& vita nofira ortaejl;) not any longer observing the Jews Sabbath, but 
the Lords 'Day on which Chrifl our Life rofe again. Exhorting the 
Chriflians not to Judaic (5/ enim ufyue nunc fecundum fudaijmum 
vmttfos. confitemur gratiam non recepijjc) For if we do yet Judaize^ 
renounce Grace. AndToiycarp (another of St. John's difciples) was of 
the fame mind with Ignatius, who colle&ed and publifhed the 
Epiflles oi Ignatius, with one of his own- And jfuftin Martyr (who 
was Contemporary with them, though, not a Chnftian till fome 
time after) makes it to be our Sunday. Yet thefe were none of the 
Romifh World (as you (peak Rep. j> ) but Greek, Fathers, and 
older than the Romifh Corruptions , or the Romifh Ufurpatiom, 
{though not older than the Church of the Romans to whom St. Tad 
wrote ;) For that Headfbip of Rome, you tell mEnq. p. tfbfl feems 
not affumed m divers Centuries after the Second Century. And 
u tIierefore this, not originally from the Romanifls (as you fanfy En$. 
p.jr) nor did they take it from what .you call Romifh Traditions. And 
it is fo taken in the Father^, Councels, and Church Hiftory all along 
to this day. To which yonr iinfwer is, Thefe are but Traditions, 
there is or cm be no certainty pom them, Rtp.p. jp, 40. (So that all 
'Htfarfn but Tradition.) But .pray how Qiall we know that RoMt 
'mentioned intheNewTeJlament is the fame with what we nm 
Kali Rome (and which hath been fo called ever fincc) otherwife 

than by fuch Tradition ? And how can you tell whether our Satur* 

m 



tort II. rhChriftimSdhatk 
day or Sunday be the fame days (in a continued Succeffion of Jewifh 
Weeks) with what they called thz f event bznd firjl days, othirwifc 
than by Tradition? and (which is more) Unwritten Tradition / You 
U us Ret> p. 3 All the Chriftim and Hebrew Churches in the world 
'e agreed that Sunday is the fhjl day cj "the (meaning, I fun. 
% of the Jewifh Week; ) Now is this any other than T?aditioni 
en ^W7//f^Tradition ? And you had told us before, Em. p 7 8 
at otherwife all the Jews and Chriflians hitherto in the World arc 
tin their reckoning: Which is nothing but Tradition; which you 
ipifei /ndpag. 93 that (in the fifth Century) All Chriflians m 
Ifxwlddid agree which was the Sabbath Jay (meaning, theTewifh 
ttbath) and which the firjl day of theweek{hxn it was by a comma* 
"*fotm they did fo agree ; ) And you add, they all agreed to call 
I Seventh Jay of the Wee^ihe Sabbath day ( meaning the Tewifb 
ibbathj but you fhould have added alfo, and to call the fir/day o f 
the Week, the Lords Jay: But it was by equal Tradition, they did fb 
»ree. And by like tradition (from the fifth Century downwards 
1 now) wefo reckon to this day; but ilill it is but Tradition 
And if (as you tell us Rep. 39, 40.) there be no certainty in fuch Tra- 
ctions, then are we not certain of either ; but, if there be, then 
are we equally certnin of both. And when vou tell us Rep. p, i 0 
Ubey were taugot it down along from Adam ingracious families from 
tatter to Son; (which was the Seventh-day in courfe from the 
treation }: If this were fa (which I can hardly believe) yet fhll 
this is Tradition, and no more. And what you add Rep. p. n± that 
tte certain Seventh Jay (in courfe from the firft creation,) was pi e- 
ced by all Nations, Wording the Sun upon Sunday; is fo weak, 
it there is not the kaft fbotflep in Hiftory, Sacred or Profane 
latlcan find) that any nation (much lefs all nations) did 
►rfhip the Sun upon Sunday more than on any other day. or 
tt any nation ( before IfraeTs coming out ot Egypt) had any 
teks at all; nor any after that time, butthejfwj oifely, before 
* nines of Chrifiiamty ; or that the names of Saturday, Sunday, 
Wonday, &c. were io much as known before that time : And if any 
J the Heathen had anv Weeks before that time, how fhall we know 
they were in ^uninterrupted circulation from the firft Crea- 
k i So that all this is not fo Much ^Tradition, but ameer Fanfy. 

true that, fince Chnftfs time, upon planting thcGofpei al] the 
Hid over, and ( with it) the Obfcrvanon of the Lords day, we 
f reafonably depend upon the Common Tradition ( which if one 
S^n fhould miftake or forget, would loon be retflified by neigh- 
Nations] but whtn ( by your awn conceflions ) no other Na- 

ion 



„ The Chrifian Sabbath. PartH 

tionin the World didobferve the Jewifh Sabbath (nor, thatwc 
kS^ntny WcckataU,) thecafe is farotherwxfc Nor is it ant 
faid I Scripture, that the jewifh Sabbath (from th^ > fig 
raining of Manna) was ^Seventh day in courfe from the Creation. 

I remember, you tell us £117. p.in, 118. and you mind me of 
it Rep. p. 40, *i that I fay nothing to it (being it feems a thing oa 
which v« 4 fiy gttat weight,) that tn the Records of parliament and 
Tthe^rts Saturday is called Sabbati, or dies 

Sabbati (the Sabbath Jay) True, (as fhppofing, by Tradition, thu 
day of our week to bewhat the Jews called the Sabbath in their 
AveeU But do not you know alfo, that ( in the fame Bf cords ) 
day is called ( Vies Vomintcus) the Lord's Jay? And it thofe prove 
faturday to be the Jewtjh Sabbath, why fhould not thefe as well 
prove funday to be the /j>rd's.day ? Ail the difference is, as to that 
vou were Quick-fighted, but Blind as to this. You may obfervc 
alfo (if that may be thought material) that the one is t Sabbati or 
dies Sabbatilin the Genitive cafe,in the fame form with dies Saturn, 
and as the other days we,) but the Lord's Jay is die Domwico (m 
the Ablative) meaning (I fuppofe) that Saturday is the day on 
which had been the Jewifh Sabbath ; but this, the day which is the 
Lord's Jay. Which different Conftruftion feems plainly to intend 
(in our Law) a different import of the words. By dies Saturn, 
or dies Luna, we do not mean, a day Injlituted by Saturn r or the 
rJMoon, as by dies Vominicus we do mean, the day Infhtuted by our 
Lord, (like'as by Cena Dominica, we mean, the Supper Injlituted 
by our Lord. ) So that thefe Records do you no fcrvice at all, 
but Dif-fervice. . 

You tell us Enq. p. 64. that the Seventh-day fabbath was injlituted 
iy our Lord Jefus Chrijl, and by him was blejfed and fanelified ; and 
that day which the Lord blejjed and fanftificd is the Lord's day ; That 
tie that blejjed it was the Lord C/ni/l ; And p.67 . The SeventhJay H 
the Sabbath of the Lord thy God Exod.20. and Deut. c. and that 
/which is the Lords-Sabbath is the Lords Jay. That If. 58. the Lord 
calls it my holy Jay ; and it cannot be the lefs his day becaufe it is hit 
Holy day; and if it be His day it is the Lords Jay. And p. 66. that 
4hc Son of Man (the Lord Jefus Chnll ) is Lmd of the Sabbath Jay', 
and that day whereof Cbrjft is Lord, is the Lords Jay. And p. 67. 
Chrijl, who gave the Sabbath was and is Lord of it. And p. 68. Chrijl^ 
as Lord of the Sabbath, who gave tt,ferfeRly underjlood his On* 
Lavo. And to the fame purpole Rep. p. 39, 40. and elfewhere. 
Now this puts us upon another Digreffion (which may take u$ 
fome time) In what coufideration oar Urd Jefus Chrijl ma^bc 



Pare [I. The ChrijtUn Sahhatk $7 

aid to have Created the World, to have Rtjled the Seventh day and 
blejfed 'n, to have given the Law upon Mount Sinai, and the Hkc. 

You may remember that I didformerly diflinguifh between what 
Chnll did as God ( in Union with the Father and Holy Ghoft) and 
what he did ( leparately ) as our Lord Jefus Chrrji (God and Man, 
as our Mediator, andFpunderof the Chrilfcian Religion;) and that 
the Lord our God in the Old Tefhment, doth not lignify jufl the 
fame as our Loid Jefus Chr/Jl in the New Tdhment. And I told 
you jDifc. p. x, J. I do agree, that our Lord Jefus Chrijl (ac,oid,>,,r 
to his 'Divinity) is God, the true God, the God that made Heaienaud 
Earth, the Qod who delivered the Law upon Mount Sinai: But 
cannot agree that Chrijl as Gcd and &/an ( in contradjlmclion to the 
father and HolyGhoJl ) did thefe things ; For be was not then Man. 
'yNow this you take beinoufly Rep. p. 4. ( that I fhould thus diitin- 
guifh) and you think the VoSlor biarnab.'e, lor lb difhnguifhing. And 
whylo? Are we not to aiihnguifh between what Chnii doth as 
God, (in common with the Father and Holy-Ghoft) and what he 
doth as ^Mediator, God and Man? Yes. Where then is the fault? 
May not I fpeak Dijlin&Iy '(to avoid miftakes) becaufe you had 
ipoken Sutyicioufly ? // infinuates (you lay) as if you haajaidj that 
f Chrijl as God and Man did all thofe things ; ( If your own wo>ds do 
Eot fo in/muate, ldid not ; (jor laid any fuch thing: ) uhereas you 
A neither f aid nor ever thought } that Chrijl was incarnate at tbcnja%ng 
^m jhe t^orjd, or at hrs giving the Law at Blount Sinai : ( Why bis 
g;ving the Law , rather than Gods giving the Law ? ) So as the 
Jjb oftor bath not we/1 J'urmifed in this ; And again, Neither I nor any 
V other that I know (lay you) has /'aid or thought that Chrijl when He 
wHeffed the Seventh day (Why when He blclled, rather than, when 
B&Wblefled ? ) was then in the Flejhjb that in this I think the Itollor 
b! enable . And yet a third time, p. 5. For the 'Dcftor to impofe upon 
Ws Reader herein as he doth ( you fay) feems b/amable ; and fuch sir- 
tifices ( you fay) the Reader may difcern afterwa\ds. And, I pray, 
^hy all this? Did 1 charge you with having fa id or thought that 
Chrift was incarnate at (JW'j making of the World, or at God's 
giying the Law at Sinai f I believe that (when you confider of it) 
you do got rhin.k he was: But if your language were inconlider it , 
jthat was not my fault. I cn : ly explained in what fen fe 1 eanagree 
tp what you faid (that our Lordjejus made the World, and gave the 
Law upon Mount Sinai ; ) If your jenfe be the fame with mine, w hy 
do you quarel with my fpeaking plainly, what vou meant? It it 
be not the fame, 'us , Ton be biamablc, uot 1. , You might as well 
(withoutall this lournef$)have fcui You meant no more, but as I do 
E^h ./T H Hut 



digitized by the CenteJ^^M^ventist Research 



58 T&e C/;r//?/^ Sabbatk Part H 

/& TJoftor ( you fay />. 5. ) herein feems to follow Mr. Trofi. 
If fo ; I know no hurt in it. But 'tis your miltake; For what I 
lay there, was written (and printed too) a good while before I had 
feen Mr. Trojss book, or knew any thing of it. For though Mr. 
Trofss book came out, a little before mine was quite finifhed ; the 
greateft part of mine was printed before his came out. And if Mr. 
TroJ's have prefied this more clofely upon you than I have done: 
You mull blame your felf for' it ; when all along you takepleafure 
to attribute to our Lord fcjus Chrift (as if with that Reduplication,) 
which was more properly to be faid of God indefinitely. If I (be- 
caufe the Holv-Ghoft is God) {honld affetl to fay, In the beginning 
the Holy Gholi created the Helens and the Earth; and, The Holy- 
Uhoftjaid, Let there be Light ; and, Tie Holy-Gboft faid, Let us make 
Man after our mage; zn&fhe Holy-Gbojl rejied the f event b-day } and, 
The Hoy Ghoft faid, I am the Lord thy God, thou [halt have no other 
God but me; ( as it no Verjon but the HolyGhoJt might be owned 
tor God ; ) Would not this look like an odd Afft&ation ? Yet at this 
rate \ou fpeak all along, affe&ing to fay Our Lord Jefus Chrift 
where it were more proper to fay God 1 hus here, The Sabbath, 
toy was infhtuted by our Lordjefus Chrift; and by him bleffed: He 
that blelied it was the Lord Chriji; and the like. Whereas this was 
not done by himfwgly, nor by him as Chrift, but by him as God, 
Mid jointly with the Father and Holy-Ghoft. And to what purpofe 
1 i it laid, Ht that blejfed it was the Lord Chrift t when this adds no 
/ie\v authority to the Law more than if it had been faid GW bleffed 
n (Father Son and Holy-Ghoft ;) for we are no more to break the 
- Law of God, than the Law of our Lordjefus Chriji. And though 
•.on foretimes admit the Father and Holy-Ghoft as fharers herein ; 
yet you fay, 'tis Eminently Chrift En<|. p. 1 1 . And Chrift you under- 
fiand as 'Principal Lffi tent of all things in Heaven and Earth, to 
whom the Creation is Eminently and 'Particularly ajcribed; and (you 
think) Eminently fpoken of Chrift, p. 6. and a*ain, (in the lame 
.^ge) you do not exclude (you lay) the Far her from this wort, nor 
/he Holy-Ghoft, but lay it is Eminently afcrtbfd to the Lordjefus 
Chriji, p. 6. and they Specially point at Chift p. ia. and the Com- 
mands given by Chriji the Mediator, p. 1 3. and the God of Jfraelwho 
lavethe Law was and is Jehovah the Son, p.- 1 j. 

Now I can allow it proper enough to fay that Chriji (as to his 
Divinity) is thcGodwho made the World (for Father Son andHoly 
Glioft are the fame God,! but it feems hard to fay (converfely ) that 
the Father Son and Holy-Ghoft (who jointly made the World) are 
'Jehovah the Son. The Father , Son and Holy-Gboft made the World; 

thercr 

I 



fart II. The Chrijlian Sabbath. 59 

therefore He that made the World (fuppofe the Father, or Holy- 
Ghoft) is the Lord Jefus Chrift, will not follow ; but onely that One 
9f thofe who (jointly) made the World is the Lordjefus Chriji. 

I thought you might have learned fo much Grammar at School, 
as to know that y'« 5*g,'*T*r doth not fignify one of the Sabbat \h 
and fo much Logician the Univcrfinr as to know that an Untv& fal 
affirmative is not to be Converted Jimplkiter ; as well as fo much 
Law at Wejiminfier, as to know that (in the Records of Parlia- 
ment ) dies 'Dominicus, or the Lords day, commonly called Sunday 
doth not fignify Saturday ; and that a midnight-day (as you wittily 
call it) that is, from midnight to midnight, is no Abfurdity, but good 
Law in Wejimmjler-hall. I am told that in Rome and Italy they 
' do reckon as you would have it ? from Sunfet to Sunfct ; beginning, 
- from Sunfet to reckon, One, Two, Three a clock^; and fo onward co 
Four andTwenty a-clock at Sunfet the next day , { fo that mid day is, 
with them, fomeumes//A7ft , « a Jock, and toixKiimc* twenty a-cloci, 
according as the days be long or fhort ; ) and I think it is theie one- 
jy that men do fo reckon. Should I now Reproach your way of 
reckoning ( from Sunfet to Sunfet ) as Rom'ifh, fopijh, Monhjjh, Rq. 
mifhTraaitton, the Rcmifb World, the Men of Rome, Rome and its 
followers? You own that Heathen f) Rome in our Saviours time, (; 
well as Chrijlian England now) did reckon from Midnieht to Mid- 
] night; and it was not, till fome agts after, i\\i\Toj*ijb, Jfonlfi , 
I jtnti<hrifiian Rome did a(fume this (jfewijh) Reckoning: And 
I would you not think it a doughty Argument if I fhould thus argue 
againft your Evening day? But I goon. 

They feem ( you lay ) Efpcc tally to refer to Jehovah the Son p. 14. 
We have here the Lord f ejus Chriji who made the World, rejiing on 
the Seventh day, blejjing andjanfft/yingof it, that is giving the Inlii- 
\tutionof it, Sec p. 13. ( and why not as well, God who made the 
World, &c.) and this recorded for the glory of our Lordjefus Chriji, 
l(why not as well, for the glory of God? ) and again ( in the fame 
i page) the Lordjefus Chriji made the World (and did not God the 
' father as well ? ) He reded on the J'eventh day, Hejanffified it, andfo 
injlituted it, and to this inftitutionyou thinhfdo refer the vcords of our* 
Lord, The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath ; He injlituted it &c. 
I What ? He more than the Father and Holy-Ghoft ? Or did he, as 
Son of Man, inftitute it? I do not think (though it feems you do) 
that thefe words refer to the Son of Mans fnjtituticn, but' rather 
f; to his power of abolition of the Jewifh Sabbath* which was foon 
pfter to follow,) For they ^re fpoken by way of derogation not of 
^Confirmation ot it. Again, The Ten Commandments were Jpoken by 

Hi/ Chriji 



Chriji Eminently p. z 4. Jfter the promulgation of the Lam by Chrjf 
at Mount Sinai p. x<l That Chriji f pake the T m Commandments p. ip, 
7 he Lord relied in heaven and his body in the grave upon His Own in, 
(iitutcd Seventh day p. 4a. He (Mr Chafiej though you hope be was 
a very Good, as we tt as a Learned man^feems ^you iayj not to have 
had dear sipprehenfions of Chrift, as Creating the world, and then 
Rellmg; nor of Chrift as /nftttutwg the Sabbath Gen. 1. i, 3, nor of 
Chr. fts confirming the Moral Law at Sinai, Exod. xo. p. 6y (Yet, I 
piefumc, he had r/^r apprehenfions of his being GWall that time.) 
Sop. 67, Ctfr/// who gave the Sabbath, and ~8. Chrid who gave it. 
The Seventh day which Chill relied upon after the Creation, p, yf f 
72? Seventh day { in the heart of the fourth commandment ) is jecured 
hyChrtli, p. 7*7. 7> fir Ft ' Sabbath Gen. z. ordained by Chntf p. 7*?. 
Obedience to Chriji s ten commandments p,8 1 , Conformity to the Laws 
of ChriB ^ that is the Ten Commandments, p. 8r. To C^/jfr laws, 
that is, to the ten Commandments p. 8 2k 7~& law our Lord hath given 
us in the ten commandments^ p. Si- 72«; authority which fir B com- 
manded it, which was Our Lord himfelf p, 8j\ Who but ChriB hath 
power to inBitute a Sabbath-day? p. 86, . Who is bound to obfervea 
day not inBituied by ChriB in fa mure > or to lay afide what He hath 
there \ Instituted t p. 86. One of ChriBs commands p. pi. ChriB can 
vindicate His commandments p. 1 1 3. 7& world was made by our Lord 
Jefus Chnft p. ijtf. is the Lord Jehovah who after the Creation in. 
Bhuted the Seventh day, reded on it, Janciified and bkjjedit. p. 1 3d. 
At Mount Smai the Commands were given } by Chriji the Redeemer y 
Hjtwsand Ginfiles. p. 13-. o f iMVi^^^S^u^i 

Now when, in all thefc pkces (and .many more) it were more 
proper to fay God indefinitely, than the Lord Jefus Chrrl},\t)d yet 
you afte# all along ro apply the Creation of the World, the fnflitu- 
t ion of the Sabbath j the giving of the Law upon Mount Sinai ; , fingly 
to our Lord Jefus Chr ill, and to him as our Mediator^ and pur Re- 
deemer, and to him Eminently *n& Efptciafy (in conrradiftin&ion 
to the Father and Huly-Ghoft ;J I had reafon to fay. {ptfe. p. j. ) 
you feemed to lay great (Irefs upon it (at which Rep, p, ^ y 0 u are 
offeoded) elfe why fhould you affeft all along fo to [peak, where 
there was no reafoji for it, and where the ward Goa would have 
ferved your turn as well? Ifeenoreafon (as you fpeak Rep. p. 5,) 
whyyoujhould (affect to) ,vary from the Scriptures ixpreffions: % * 

Nor do I fee any caufe why youffioula 1 be fo highly. offended, that 
I fhould (without any reffcftion upon you ) Explain what I meant, 
and what I hoped you had meant. ( or Ihould have meant) though 
your Exprellions were jultly exceptionable. 



Digitized by the Center 



tt Iff The ChrifiUn Sdhfotk 6 1 

I add further ; Though you now tell us, Tou did not fay nor thin^ 
at ChriB was incarnate at the making of the World (and I believe, 
en you conlider of it, you do not think he was) ; yet you do 
: retrad your faying, That Our Lord Jefus ChriB did, as our 
diator and Redeemer ', create the World &c y and that (as fuch ) 
( did it Eminently and Especially (in contradiUinftion to the Fa- 
er and Holy-Ghoft,) and that Jehovah who made the World, is the 

d Jefus CbrtB. Which I do not think to be fate expreffions. 
r Norhave you any reafon to charge me (as Rep, p. y.) with In- 
Rations againfl the 2>eity of ChriB: (And Iprefume you do not 
pert me as to that point, whatever youpieafe here to infinuate.) 
all I return you your own words which there follow, Why you 
Id thus begin in -a cafe which relates to the Deity of ChriB with 
*h infinuations fas if I would derogate from it) for which you have 
colour from my Dijcourfe 7 unlefs tt were to infufe fome Prejudice > 
ton not willmg to conje&ure t Mult all be thought enemies to the 
_ uty of Chriji, who do not approve of vour Saturday fabbathi 
El do own that the IDhineTerfon called in Scripture h tiy& the 
}Pord y and the Son of God (or God the Son) was from all Eternity 
yoith God and was God ( and is God ) and did ( in Union with the 
Father and Holy-Ghoft) make the World ; and that the fame 2>hine 
Per ion (remaining the fame Terj'$n) was (afterwards) incarnate^ 
land did (as God and Man) become our Mediator and Redeemer, and 
It fuch) is commonly defigned by the title of our Lord Jejus Chriji; 
Wit I do, not know that as jucfa he'made the World, (for there is one 
mediator between God and Men y the Man Chriji Jefus \ x Tim, 1. y ) 
Wor do I know that he did enter upon thcExecution of his Mediatory 
wfct, or the work of Redemption^ before he was the Seed of the 
Woman, that is, before he became Man. *Tis true it was before 
Wefigned, and by God Z>«t<v<^ and the Bffeft oS [ it did look back- 
ward to thofc before Chrift ; but ;he Execution (of what was be- 
fore decreed) was after he became Man ; not before* the Creation of 
$e World, And what you allege from Epk 1. 2,^+. the Father hath 
fyfen tts in him before the foundation of themorld^ n nothing to the 
ftrpofe ; for though we were chofen befure the foundation of thje 
torld to be in him, and that we fhould be holy y &c yet 11 was not 
ficreed thatweftiould be befote the foundation of the World, : or 
Jut we fhould be holy before the fbimdation of xhe. Wprld : and 
W 5. having 'Predejlinated us to the Adaption oj ' Chrfdr^n byjejus 
vrift ; our Predejiinatioh was beTore, hut^our jiaiptwn hy Jejus 
btiJLw& after. Nor was ^ O^Uo^j^^Ca^ ffltdipify oi 
tycemer nil the FaU of Map : hut.Uic^^^ 



62 



The Chriftian Sdktk 



Part. II, 



The Chrifun Sabbath. 



*1 



(I think) before the Fall ; and therefore not created by Chrifhs,' 
Mediator ; but by that Divine Perfon ( in Union with the Father fart I T, 
and Holy-Choir. ) who afterward became Man, and was our Ri. u. av ._ . ■ r , 
deeper and /fatfiftr. And if the Creation be more Eminently to be £7'^"? ^ a " d ^ the Seventh day) is no proof that 
afcribed to one of the three Perfons rather than the other, I mould £ u f & f l , he N . ew Teftament ( that is the day ot our Lord 
dioofe toafenbe it to the Father ( rather than Eminently to the £ t^/A V aT ^^r 0 "^^ JfTT^^ 
Son) becaufe in our toft* 1 we fay >Mfew in God //^Father ^ fef'^ 7 f «# ^ . For by //jfZ.^ (Jehovah) in the Old 
mighty Maker of Heaven and Earth ; and m Jefus Chnjt His onely P ™ n <> » ™ ai " ^ indefinitely ( with joint re fpeft to Father 
And we doufe to diftinguifh between God the Creator and J»J d H° v-Chclt^ but the Lord y^&jin theNewTefca- 
CAr/j? //j? Redeemer T ^ meant of 0ar W# Wrjf? ( as you cannot but 

' Yet I did not nttrMci you for faying that God who created tk S ; i J) ld ^ f Cup of the Lord , w ;Ar 

«rtf (Father Son and Holy-Ghoft) « 0«r LordJefusCkrift ; (1 ft* ana ^^.~r ^ Z.w* &pMr, i Cor io. «. 
onely explained what 1 meant ; and if you mean fo too, there is no f™ e t*?! ™T [ ™? ^V^^T 5 10 be) 

hurt u £) As neither did I reproach you for divers other unl'afe J « e .9j. th f ™» < he ^ °t our * Cfrrf appoint. 
Expreffions : As when you tell us Lwi is the Effence of God, En,. W h ,T as the * ° un J^. oi our (Mian Religion ; And accord- 
p. if. which Ithould nothavefaid. I know 'us faid that CoW, TTy ] X V\ f ? mefonn > 5 T^X* 13 the 

to, ( i >• 4, 8, that is, a Z^*£ God, or a very Lov,n, g ° ^ Was byhim appointed. And to play upon 

God and therefore I would fay that Lm is a !©««r Jtf/r/W, J" n *Jf im X ° } the *fi ( which fometimes ilgnines the 

or (if you will) an Effential Attribute (refuting from Gods Effence £ f ' n V° m « ,mcs J c ^Cart/I) is but loofe arguing, and 
and inseparable from it;) and fo is Hatred and Wt at h (for God ™ US Difpumion. \et tfaisis all you pretend, for proving 
dothasweUAreEvilasheiwwGood; and is as well Angry with J* ™« ™*™A f , ^dsjay ^tw.i.io. isthe Seventh-day-fah- 
Sin, as P/eafedwith Duty ; ) yet I would not fay that Hatred ad 
Wrath are Gods Effence. And you tell us again ( in the fame page) t 
that Truth is Gods Effence. I know itis laid that God is a GW ( /' h ^ , 
Truth Deut.32.4. &6rt<J. tandcannotLy,}andrif^/r/>«^ ll jf?i ;h " ft : ^ do in vour ^;// add any new llrength to 
Truth (,mU) that is, what the Spirit teffifies is True : YctI ^ old Argument, to take ofF this Anfwer which I gave to it. 
would not therefore fay that Truth is Gods Effence (though Truth . * J 11 '" rth " 3« J »« £« the Lords day, jjr« 

in God be an Enential Attribute:) For itisfaidalfo that God i s r^^^J'^ as you would have it: Whydoyoufind 
a Jealous God, yet I fhould think it a bold expreffion (andjuftly rV^ c w"*? 8 th v" j- y ? , The da y wh / ch Y C obfervc 
burnable ) to fay that is Gods ^«re Nor would I iar !/,L7 ^Tl ! j " ^ u^v. ^T^' r " d *l ieep U ^ 
(as*. 30.) becaufe Godts l/ghtandin htmisno darknefi , fob. ,. f . and by that name it hath been kept from the Apoflles 

therefore ^/ is the Effence o\ Gbi : For 'tis faid alfo V ffW ^ W r 1 T'p w«inual Succeffion from that 

« * confummlfire, Heb. il 19. Deut. 4. 34. yet I fhould think it J ' ^ h fe? B S" ed ln f ^' I' 1 °„ ^ 7 hl f » ^ hetllc u r " be ^ ™ 
a very unfavoiry expreffion to fav, * cmfumng fire is Gods EJfenct. ) °* Jf feve « lh ^ a > Jejewiffi Week this is the day we keep. 
We fay indeed that Gods ^«>r are not Things j?«#diftinft to ^ the/^day, and you fay tis the/^ day, but 

Cut res & res, as the Schools fpeak) but ModaUj at molt, ( or ra- * = v « » " ^"«""«" _and I >;our Mtmds { to which you ap- 



ther not fo much, biit onely ration*' ratiocinate,) yet! would not **) Jo no more prove that ^/^/ms in acontmua fucceflion 
therefore fay that Love is t{e Effence of God, or that Hatred h zhz th * J ewjft ^an that ^ W /«; £ «, ( ,11 the fame 

Effence of God, however EJfentiil to God, as inieparable from his is m cominua fucceffion from the Apofiles Lvds day. 

Ellence." f^^T** "■ 5,0 3 : ) L 0U W^ have nothnig^ but 7r«^//;i?« for the 0»e; You have 



T6 rctiirn therefore from this Digreffion, and apply it to out 
prefent bufinefs; The Sabbath of the Lord our God, ( who made 
I ') Heaven 



You do not fhew that any where that 
Iptf* , or that x«e/«x» doth any 



"thing b:;t Tradition for the other; lor there is no man now 



mg, that can remember either, 

fhould now have done with this point but that I am called upon 
p. 40. and again Rep. p, 75-, to anfwer your Colleclicns for the 

Seventh 



Digitized by the CenteJ^^^BLventist Research 



J>art II. The Chrijtun Sabhath. 6$ 

U TkChriJIUnStlhth, Parrlli after St. >« wrote his Revelation, if not J^"' a "J,Wf f g 

I* , , • -n \ „ ■ ■ , , -[mother ot St. Ws dilciples who collected and publhhed the 

Sevenjb day m Derogation to the Dominical day , as you cail it * n ° 1 ^ f j { tius toget her with one of his own on that occa- 
But why mult dies Dommicus ( lor lo, 1 prefumc you had it in g" m d h fy u (i} n Martyr about twenty years after ; and by /«. 
the Latine from whence theie Collections are made) be all alongP 0 "' r , rt J,/J and th l Fathers, Counceh, and Church Hilbry 
tranilated the Dtmhucalday, rather than the Lords Jay? Is midksV* us > ^ertuUian, and tne Miners, ,yj . ^ ^ nftf Aenv 



minical Orifon for what others in plaiaEnglifh call the Lords Sip 
per, and the Lards Vrayer* And why then mult it be with you tk 
'Dominical day ! Is it bcaauie you think Dominical, a Finical word? 
Or,' becaufe yon would nraute your Englifli Reader to nuke hia 
think that the 'Dominical day doth ligiiity ibmewh.it other than til 
Lords day f You mind me fometimes el the Records inTar/iamtat; 
but you may remember alfo that what in thoie Records, is culled 
dies Dominieus in Latine is in the \~%xz& Records ( and A&s of Pah 
lament) called, in Englifh, the Lords day cemmonly called Suxdcj, 
However, I know no great hurt in the word Dominical ^as to thoft 
thatunderfland Latine) fave that it is a needleft Affeilalion: Audi 
as lor thofe Englifh Readers who donot 'underltand Latine, I wouid 
tell them that the Dominical day is in plain Englifh the Lords dtf, 
however you may pleafe to difguife it, with a hard Word. • ' 

This Colk&ion is a work, it feems,of fome years (in fever*! timti 
and in fever al places,, and for divers years, Enq.;>. no. though with 
interruptions,) to which, you fay, the DocJorfays nothing, andrt 
which the DoBor anjwers not. Tis true 1 did not fay much to it, 
becaufe 1 thought it not to need aa Aafwer, and was conteated u 
trull: the Reader with it. r .t v \.i . u-uk 

But lince you caii upon me to anfwer it, I Have looked it over 
again, and though I am llill of the fame miad, yet lhall comply 
with you therein. , 

Thequellion we are now upon, is, whether the Dominical 
have been all along obferved; and what you have to fay againflu 
in thefe Collections : lor {hewing When the obfervation of the Jevcnti 
day ended, and when the obfervation of the [fir ft day began amon$. 
Chriftians, Enq. pag. 8 r- But if you admit that the obfervatiol 
of the Seventh t day ended when that of the Firft day began, K 
mull be very early. 

That the Lords-day was obferved very early, not onely by St 
John, Rev. t. 10- but by his Difciple Ignatius within ten year) 

" atte 



[to be authentick. 

F Your Colleaion begins Enq. p. 91. and ends pag. 130. with many 
|f your Defcants intermixed. ) Wherein you gl ve us ( it I do not 
fcif.reckon) between^ and tbreefcore teftim'onies for the obfe - 
vatton of L Lord's V(or,as you pleafe to caU it the 
2k) in the Firft, Second, Third, Fourth, Filth, Sixth Century, 
k ami fo downward! Befide which you tell 111. mp&p 

home ExpreffionsinHrfiry (how many, 5011 do not tell us) ;«> 
WZr of tie firft day, ( which 'tis Candid to Confefs, but Partiality 
fo tol) WyoVtellusA He who mil tazepam* may 
l L much rmre m Binius, the Magdeburgenjes »<W<**?- 

And thefe Teftimonies for the Domimcal day, ( if your Dates be 
tight) begin very Early, in the Ftril Century ; that is, I fuppole, 
befo e sTWj writing the Revelation. Our Saviours death was 
a ou year oflhat Century and S. ,John wrote : hts Reve^ 
lation about theV or W «" Jft thereof, fome years befo e h is 
death: for he lived till within a year or two of the end ot 

^YoSuI" f. 96. That in the fir/1 Century, Contentions were 
flirted up about celebrating the Paft-over upon the Z)-o # 
And though pag. 111. you mince the matter a little by calling it 
TutTfecoWor thirl Century, yet even there you cite Lmus 
Cent 1 B 1. and you there own this Dom meal day ( that is, m 
pfam Engliul the lords day) to the firft day 
the Jemjh Sabbath. Though elfewhere you would have « that 
the Lords day mentioned by John Rev t : 10. " 
Jath, Enq. fa. And you infill upon it Rep. 0. 39; tha t th Lords 
day Rev. i. to. is not onely the name of a day buf the name of the 
Seventb-day Sabbath. And Enq. p. 69 that 'tts a Steahnga^ay the 
' lords.da/jiom the Seventb-da) Sabbath and gtvmgthat name to be 
) firft day : Mi great endeavours you ufe to perfwade us lo to think. 



ad great endeavours you 1 



■ 



Digitized by the Centei 



565 The Chtiftian Sabbath. Part It 

Enq atfo.toAfip . and^p . ?, 7, if. .p. 39 , 40. though you 
cotitcis (Em p . 6+ .) that/w» Text or Context you find nothing 
very conjiderable to that purpofe. 6 

Notf what you call about thefecondor third Century, is (by your 
-own citation) ;« f&jfrj* cWtfuiy, and in all likelihood while St. 
John wis yet alive, and even before he wrote the Revelation. 

Yet I will be juft to you ; Jnicetus and ViHor ( whom you cite 
as concerned in this bufinefs, p. 9 <J.) were Bifhops of Roine in the 
JecondCcnnuy (not inthefirif;) but the difpute about it was older 
thanlo- and/. 114, youc i tc jfc^ to the fame purpofe, 
who was before either of thofe two; And p. p6. (as before) and 
again />. n 3 . you own it to have been in the firft Century ; and 

B*ifo) t S™ US ' Cent ' l ' B ' l6 ' * nd again ZW ' 1 

I .did not expert thnMt.Bampfield would have fbrnilhed us wit 
?„ S? WCS fo ancient (as in the firfi centmy, while fome of th 
Apoftles wereyet living) for the obfervation of Eajier, (though 
juh fome difference about the day) and (at/,, tl) e l cko nSt 
Taul amongft thofe who fo obferved it 

frSlL^I* y ° U ? U U l £w? " * at foRie ke P J Eafter <w AS 

day of the week, others on the fourteenth day of the firjl month 

™TTT B ' 1 £ ^4ls to bfamXke 

Thofe w ho kept it on the firfi day of the Wee^ ( on which Chri 

a\v*TJ S Sf^f^ >/ * on that 

Sf2S^feL / *^ HW ? « on ^f^enthday 

L! ««»^ (whatever day of the week it happened to be) For 
this was ; neither the day of the tTeek, nor the Say of the Mmth 
on which Chnft Rofe, but on which he Died. And therefore kept 
it either *s z Contmuation of the>«^ n/i-ovToa S' Z t 

this is be We our bufinefs, and therefore I pafc it. 

/ 7° U . teI V U £ *£ 8 * of rtf Vernal and M- 

lZtc ? T m T P""*fiil *» not underftand { nor, 

I fuppo e, do you ) nor fhall I trouble my fell to make/,,* of it 
But will excufe it as being a thing out of your rode. ' ' 
Now how foon fo ever the controverfy did arife about keeoin* 

tel u ty e, 5 ifll ) And whtyou 
S /Lvf % P * ^^hatyou /«y^ the/e authorities, tofhevo that 
I / 11 ff S ? '{* World did vbtch was ( by Tradition) 

%M 't d ^f M Jt F ^ ^ °f tbt (iuftould haJc 
added, and whtch ms the Vommm/day) and thtlthey Tapeed, 

you 



Part IL The Ckrifiim Sabbath* 67 

you fay ? (but it was by tradition) to call the Seventh Jay of the week, 
the Sabbath day ; you fhould have added, and the faji day of the 
week, the Z>ominkal day. You might have obferved alio that all 
this for the Sabbath day is but (what you call) Tradition, and the 
fame Tradition is as full for the Dominical day (the Lords day ) being 
the FtrB day of the week For how came they thus to agree in the 
fftb Century } the time you cite? Was it not from a preemption 
•that ( from Ch rifts time downward) by a continued tradition from 
(hand to hand the memory o$ the Seventh day (of the Jewifh Week.) 
was prefcrved, and the memory of the Lords day like wife? And by 

0 like Tradition (and no otherwife) is the fame memory preferved 
(from the fifth Century to-our Time. 1 

1 You do not deny therefore, the dominical day (the Lords day) 
rtohave been then obferved all along, and by that name, and taken to 
be the fame with the firft day of the ( Jewilh ) Week Which is the 
thing I was to prove. 

; But, you tell ns, p. pi. that in fome places there were publick 
djjemblies m other days alfo ; f A nd no doubt but there were ; like 
:3s now there are publick Aflemblies for Prayers and Sermons on 
^week-days, and in fome places every day, for thofe to repair to 
who have leifure and opportunity ot fo doing:) And you name 
me Sabbath, the "Dominical day, the fecond and fourth of the Sabbath 
\{vohkhyou take to be Monday and Wcdnefday)*and Parajceven (which 
ma take to be Good Friday, (perhaps others may take it to be every 
^ Friday) p, 92,93, 94, 97, 99. But ftill you own the "Dominical day 
Uzas one; And then, their meeting alfo on fome other days, doth 
Hot gain-fay their obferving of this day. ' 

V You tell us />■ 94- and again p. 99. that amon»ji the days for pub- 
miaffembltes the ^Dominical day is mojtly named, (as being indeed 
the chief day fo obferved, ) but amongfi fome (you fay ) the day 
tf the Sabbath is found, (but not alone without the Lords day, or 
in (lead thereof.) And again The Dominical day was folemn to ChrU - 
ftians, but amongB other feHivals mention is made of the Sabbath : 
And yet again, When they did affemble, and how often, is not ex- 
prejly written but the mofi mention is made of the Sabbath and of the 
Dominical day. So (till the Lords-day is one } whatever other days 
htfometimcs or fomewbere obferved. 

Von own alfo, p. 97. that of thefe two days mdftly named, the 
Domtn'cal day was preferred ; and that, on the Sabbath day they were 
mt tojudaize but might work, but not on the Dominical day ; and this 
as old at leaft as the fourth Century, by your own cita'tion. And 
many fuch teiUmonics you give us all along, of not working on the 

A . ^minify 

tist Research ' ^ Utojiia Park 



68 The Chnfiian Sabbath. Part II. 

Dominical days, but fpending them in Religious Exercifes. And 
own that (at leaft as early as the Twelfth Century) it was called 
the Chriftian Sabbath, p. 9 y« Which doth not well agree with wha^ 
you have pag. 118. where you would have us think it was not lo 
called till by jome late writers, within Eighty years or thereabout. 

You own alfo this difference, as high at leaft as the fourth Cen. 
turv, p. 9 a, 93. ( though at /. lot. you would have us think this 
coufiitution not to be earlier than the twelfth Centuty,) between the | 
Dominical day anl the Sabbath (between the Lords day and Satur- 
day) that Saturday was kept as a Faft (in memory of Chnfts lyingj 
in theGrave that day ) but the Lords day as a Feftival ( in memory 
of Chrifts Refurrection) p. pi,93> °4> 91>&k $ 8 > IO, » T ,°*> 
But, publick,Faftingdays {you tell us/>. 93.) were kept holy toGoi\ 
as well as Feft'tvals; and there doth appear no great difference whether , 
they Feaft or Fajt on that day. Surely there is. The Sabbath (La 
13. i, 3.) is to be kept as a Feaft of the Lotd; and therefore to 
Faft on that day, is not to keep this Sabbath. You fay further, that,! 
jomeperfons and in Jome places did not faft but dine upon this day. 
That is, ( if I do not mifunderftand it ) they did notfo much as keep 
it as a Faft. But however, the Lords day was kept, and kept as 4 
TeH'sval. . * 

Some (you tell us p. 109, no, in, 114.) did keep their Sab- 
bath from Saturday noon, or from Saturday three a-clock, till Sun- 
riftng on Monday morning. But this makes nothing again!! the Lords ■ 
day, for that was therein obferved intirely, and hedged-in on 
both fides. 

You tell us p. 0J-. that on the Sabbath day, William the Conquero«\ 
on the principal Feaft had magnificent andfumptuous banquets, whtco\ 
the) called a profanation of the Sabbath. But which of the days ( the 
firft or the feventh) you cannot certainly fay, but Think, (you tell us) 
// was the Seventh-day fabbath. What if 1 fhould think it were the 
Firslday Sabbath; were not My Thinking as good authority as 
yours? Since you own p. 9?. that, about that time, the Lords di)\ 
was called the Cbriftian Sabbath. And I doubt fome other of youf 
citations in favour of Saturday, may ( if well examined ) be found 
to refer to the Sunday- fabbath. But I do not trouble my felt to ex« 
amine them. 

You tell us, pag. 1 1 y, 1 it, 118, 1 to, that (in England) we bam 
no Statute made for Sunday (that you know of ) till that in Edward 
the Sixth's time. But doth that prove the Lords day was not till 
then obferved in England f (But you own the Kings Writs, and Or- 
der of the Lord jMayor, to that purpofe, older than fo.) Do yc* 



irt II. The Chrijlian Sabbath. 69 

low of any Statute or Aa of Parliament (before that time ) made 
%\ or for Saturday Jabbath ! There was no Imperial Law fife, 
know of) older than Conftantme, fo. "the txerafe «ff%»- 
j» Religion; but arc we therefore to think it was notpiaBijed 

feitrMyou tell us,. , >T» h "Hellions sou can 

ie with your few books, that, for noo ftan or more they (in 
neland) received the Observation of Sunday, (However, this is long 
"fore King Edward the Sixth's time.) But in the year 1 too you 
Z it p. us- But do you find that, before that time, thev kept 
Lr Sabbath oa Saturhy! No: Nordo you find, it feems whether 
Jfore that time they did keep any Sabbath at all You fay, they 
hA x weekly day of Reft, (I fuppoie they had, and that it was the 
\1rds dlycLmU UedSuJl ) But all ^old^ecordsyet ex 
W tt J„ down to this day, you fay, do callit (that .day of reft) the 
ibatlday. I do not know where to find thofe old records (olde 
un the year xioo) v>h.ch tell us that Saturday was their H cehy 
ETxk Itmay betruethatin old Records ( I know not whe- 
wrViold) and in J™**" too, Saturday is called dies Sabbat % and 
i is at th,s day, (as being the fuppofed day of the Jjwjfs* 
la I Yet, not Saturday bJthe LorJs day is our weekday of Res! 
nd I was 0 ( for ought vou fhew to the contrary ) ever flncc 
Eiftianit, was received amongft us. You own that fincethe 
f car i 00, tie Lords day hath been received as our weekly day of Reft 
ana fo it 1 at this day/though Saturday ) is yet called dies Sabbat, 
\ And when vou produce thofe Records (older than the year 1 100, 
,5 therein you find Saturday called dies Sabbati, I fuppofc we fhaU 
Here find Sunday called dies Dommtcus. 

1 You tell us of Markets kept on the Dominical day p. 116. in tne 
Le of King Jcbn and Henry the Third. This perhaps may prove 
ha it was not fo well obferved as it ought to be; but it doth not 
,rove \i not to be at all obferved. For this was after theyeamoo, 
Sen you own the Lords day to be received. You tell us £«f P-J9, 
WiVZZ elfewhere, in the time of Nehem ah (znd before the 
tlotivitv) of Markets kept on the Jewijh Sabbath ; but doth it thence 

at all obferved ? In the mean time, were no tffariets held on 6> 
turday? This you fiiould have proved, to have proved a preference 
Ef Jturday-fabbath to the Lords day: (Otherwife, this proves no 
Lnto^tyMtonhx Monday J abbath.) But-you fhew 
>t a word of this. 

You 



ed by the Cei 



rentist Research 



70 The Chrifti&n Sabbath. Part IH 

You tell mp. 117. (much to the famepurpofe) out of Mr. Trin 
that we find by the Writs to fummon Parliaments that they were 0} 
old appointed to meet upon Sundays ( I fuppofe you mean, fometimes, 
not always,) even in the time Eaw.I. Edvo. II. Edw. III. 
which Edw. I fucceeded Hen. III. who fucceeded King John. The 
Succeffions you reckon right ; (But all thefeare fince the year'rioo.) \ 
Pray do me the favour (next time you examine thofe Records) to 
inform me, whether (in thofe Writs of Summons and in the Re* 
cords of thofe Parliaments) the Sunday be not called dies Dtminicus. 
For if fo, Sunday was then the Lords day, and fo reputed, though 
Parliaments did fometimes meet on thofe days. • And I have the 
more reafon to think fo, becaufe even here you call it the Dominical 
day, which I prefume you would not have done if it had not been 
there dies Bomintcus. 

I remember that in the Reign of Kins Charles I, (if I were not 
then mif-informedj they were wont to lit infrivy-Counfel and hear > 
Caufes, on Sundays in the afternoon ; (whether well or ill I am not' 
now todifpute,) and I have heard the reafon afligned, becaufe they 
could not meet on a better day than when there were folemn Prayers 
for them in all the Congregations of England. And I have been told ' 
(and perhaps you may remember it) that in the late Reigns, it was 
then ufual to plays at Cards on Sundays. Shall we thence conclude, 
the Lords-day was not then obfetved in England? You know the 
contrary. 

But, you fay further, Hick II. who was depofed (you fay) by 
his Popifh rebellious Subjeffs frd Clergy ( what's this to the purpofe } 
and on whom is this intended to reHeft ? on thofe of 48 ? or thofe 
of 88 ? or of <Jo? ) who fucceeded Edw. Ill the Parliament ap- 
pointed to meet upon Sunday, met that day and adjourned till Monday; 
From which time Prinfays, no Parliaments have been fummoned to 
meet on the Dominical day. (Doth Mr, Pr/Vcall it the Dominical 
day r) I confefs I have not examined all the Records to anfwer this 
Allegation : But perhaps you may remember that (within our me- 
mory) Olivers Triennial? ar foments were ordered to meet on Sep j. 
whatever day of the week it might happen to be ; and that the firft 
of thofe Triennials did meet on Sunday, Sept j, i6?+ did then (I 
think) hear z Sermon, and adjourned till Monday. And you may re- 
member that in the year 1641, the Parliament then fate on a Sunday, 
and their Printed Votes for that day, bear date Die Vominico %.Aug. 
1641. and if you fcarch the Journals of Parliament, for that time, 
you will find it fo. But fhill we thence conclude, That, in thofe 
years, the Lords day was not obferved in England? I fhould rather 

from 



irtll Tk Chrifoan. Sabbath. 71 

thence conclude (and we know it was fo) that it was obfer- 
, elk their Votes would not have been dated Die Dominico. 
•You tell u* feveral times, that there be fome Chrijhans who to 
l day do obferve Saturday, and yoi; tell us p. 110. who rhofe are, 
w Eabijjincs, or Mid-land Ethiopians (the fame people, but by a~ 
rther name. ) Purchas, you fay, writes of the Habijtnes, as obfer- 
ng the Saturday Sabbath. What ? that day folely, in oppofition 
Ithe Lords-day ? No ; but they hep it folemnly equal to the Domini- 
Hday, for which you cite Brerewoed's Enquiries. And lout of San* 
Travels ) they celebrate Saturday (as he calls it J as well as Sunday. 
u own therefore their Celebration of the Lords-day; and there- 
:e not of Saturday in fieadof //, or in Oppofition to it 
But you fhould have told us alfo (whicli is a fecond anfwer to 
4 Allegation) that the fame Habijfines do obferve Circumcifion al- 
-ind fo dojudaize in more things than one. And when they retain 
"nmcijkn (not in oppofition to, but) in conjunftion with Bap. 
j no wonder if they retain xhtjewijh Sabbath togerher with 
Lords-day, 

r ou tell us,/. 119. that the Grecians and their Churches (that 
fome of them, not AH,) do keep tie Saturday Fejihal^ that is (as 
pur felf expound it) they eat Flejhon that day \ and forbid to Faji 
any Saturday except Eajler-eve. (For you tell us p. ?8. that by 
rag, is meant, NoUDining; and accordingly, to Dine is your 
eftival ; and fo you diftinguifli it Enq> p. pj, lome Dined and fome 
? *jted on the Sabbath day. ) But do they not obferve the Lords-day ? 
es ; they celebrate divine fervice as folemmly on the Sabbath as on the 
mmica) day. ( We are then fafe as to this point. ) But you need- 
not have gone fo far; you might have found thofe nearer home, 
ho folemnly Celebrate divine feivice on fPednefdays, Fridays, and 
iturdays, as well as on the >Lords- day ; (and in fome places, on e- 
ry day of the week ; ) But do they therefore not obferve the Lords 

I You tells us/>. 1 1 of divers Provinces of Chriftians, fubiea to 
^Patriarch of Constantinople. Well. But are there any oi thefe 
vimes which do not obferve the Lords-day f and are you fure 
i do ( all of them) celebrate divine fervice on Saturday alfo ? - 
|¥ou tell us p. \\$. that in in the year z$s$, there were (you 
uk at Some) fome Sabbatarians; who, it fecms, held that the Z)o- 
Vcal day was not to be obftrved ; but who are faid to be otherwise 
teticaL But doth it thence follow, that the Lords day was not 
en obftrved at Some t Perhaps it may be faid, a hundred year 
lice, that, about this time, Mr. Bampjield wrote a Book for the 

Satur* 



Digitized by the Centej 



ti&t Research 



?£ TkChrifiUtSahbath. Part IE 

Saturday- fabbath ; But thill it be thence, concluded, that the LarA 
no* generally obferved in England? Perhaps it may \A 
Z\C at fonfe ^ ofofc Lords-day, there b«n H 
ftif&M and fomc other Profanations ? But mult it be thence conJ 
MBS? the Lords-day is not at all celebrated becaufe there a«| 
fome who profane it ? as there always was, and always will be, I 
long as there be wicked Men in the world. _ ■ 
You had told us, (much to the fame purpofe) p. ioc. that « 
iU Zr7o V fame are /aid to preach W^^; 
Grecian Cujlome, That It was a Vuty to wor/bip upon the Sabbath A 
like as upon the Dominical day. There was it leems(evcn _ by tliofifl 
no doubt mlde of the Lords-day, theonely doubt was, 
Saturday alfo. And the like (tor ought appears) might be the f «H 
of youi Mother Sabbatarians in tor it is but itjeems^ ; 5 o»fl 
fclfciteit) that they were againftobferving the Lords-day, )«■ 
^ do not affirm it, or 'that your Author fo fays ; onely ttfeems fr* 
you ; (becaufe they are called Sabbatarians.) I 
Yoi tell us p. iox. that S*crvi/« Schola/licus (in the fourth CcaJ 
■ tury) about the Vkerfity of Obfervathns m divers places, toucbM 
Ea/tt, Fafling, Marriage, Service, with other h celt -fiaft ica IR /ftJ 
fays, Twbing the Commtnion there are fundry f^T™% 
Yomes,for though in a manner aU Churches throughout the wM 
World do celebrate and receive the holy <SMyJleries, (that is, thc Cofflj 
munion or Lords Supper) every Sabbath day aft er other ( lu 
is, as well on Saturday, as on any other day of the Week ) jet * 
People inhabiting Alexandria and Rome,of an old tradition do not 1^ 
it, (that is, becaufe, as you tell us elfewhere, they ufed to FaJiuM 
Saturday in memory of Chrifts lying in the Grave on that da| 
they did not ufe on Saturdays to have the Communion or LoJ 
Supper, as on other days they had, as-there : was occafion .] I A* 
here you run out into a large defcant about Holy Mfertes; hat7J 
celebrating and receiving the Holy dHyJieries you take to be ■ their M 
lick weekly Ajfemblies for Preaching, and for Hearing the Gm 
preached, for Prayers and Praife,and for Baptifm and tbe ^ffim 
&c Now if you will take it fo to be, who can can help it ? Otnen 
I fuppofe, will take the receiving the Holy Myfleries to be the rem 
ving tie Lordsfupper in particular ; for you tell us tis the van* 
ofCuftomes touching the Communion And then you tell us, we m 
here Socrates a learned writer pofilively affirming all the Churm 
every where throughout the World, as every wee{_came about, hoiam 
then- Religious Allemblies, celebrating the Myfiertes, 1. e. admmjtrm 
Baptifm, the Lords Supper, 'Prayer, 'Preaching, Singing, &c. «/J 



ft II. The Qhriftim Sabbath. 73 

Sabbath day, that is the Scventh-dayfab&ath, upon every Seventh 
after other, except the Alexandrians and Romans; who then refund 
'as ah [the Chrifiim Churches in the world be/ides did, (which 
ur detcant^not Socrates s words.) And a great Harangue abow 
we have for the greateft part of two pages,/>. 1 oa,i o j. and you 
t it again and again afterwards. And when all comer, to al],i't is 
more but this, that the Churches of Rotne and Alexandria, (who 
as all other Churches did, obferve the Lords-day, but did ufc 
fy? upon Saturday,) did not ufe on Saturday (their day of fall) to 
brate the Lords Supper (as on other days they did, as there was 
lion;) whereas other Churches (whicS did not life to fait on S j- 
■y) did {as there was occafion) as well on that day, as any other, 
brate the Communion, from time to time. Surely you will not 
nd (out of Socrates) that tbofe other Churches did not obferve ' 
Dominical day: For that is contrary to your whole Collc&ion. So, 
all this is hutgreat Cry andltttletVoollMow <foth this prove that 
did not obferve the Lords-day ? Which yon know they did. * 
. that of all that we have heard hitherto, there is not one alle- 
on, that I can fee, of any people, who (whatever other cay* 
did obferve) did not obferve the Lords-day, 
tot you tell us a long ftory, with your Defcant about it, p. ic6. 
fo onward to p. i l6. as if the Obfervation of the Lords day 
e not received in Scotland till the year 1x03, becaufe of a La : j. 
made toF that purpofe {you think )■ by the King and farlimem 
vtlond Which I take to be much like to what you tell us elfe- 
■re,/>. t iy, 117. of no Law for it in England by tit King and 
liament nil Edward the Sixth's time.) And would have it 
gbt, that, till then, the Saturday-Sabbath was there obferved, 
this 1* to beg what you were to prove. If they did not till 
receive the Lords day ( which I do not believe, ) vbu fliould 
Cproyed that they obferved (before that time) any Sabbath at all 
in all your long Story, I do not find one word to that purpofe .So 
(for ought appears) the queftion was not between Saturday 'fab- 
i*\\&Smd*y-jabbath ; but between Sabbath and No- fabbath. And 
u think this an honour to them that they were the laft in this fart 
r IF irld % which admitted the Ftrft day, p. 1 1 1 \ 1 j £ I do not take 
p be at all an honour , that till then they had no Sabbath at all. 
I do not doubt, for my o\vn part,but that when they firft received 
lftianity, they did with it (as other nations did) receive, 
Lords^day. For whether Chriftiamty were in Scotland firffc 
ted by the Wefiein Teacher s 7 or (as you think p. n 3.) 
he Greciansy the Lords-day was.obferved by both : for though 
; K they 



74 The Chrifttitt Sabbath. Part II. 

they differed as to the point of Eafter, ( not whether it (hould to 
obttrved or no, but on what day it Ihould be obferved ) they did not 
differ as to the Lords-day ; but both agreed, as well that it Jhsuldii 



obferved, as onwhat day. And from whether foercr of the tw<^ \L<trds.d*y for as you call it the Dominical day) is 
the Scots received their Cbrtflianity, from the fame ( I doubt not) peed to figmfv the firfi day of the week in cont 
they received a I fo the Obfervation of the Lords^day, which was t he Jewifb Sabbath. 



art IL The Chrifiian Sabbath. 7S 

It appears alfo, all along, from your own Collection, that from 
f fir ft Century (in the Apples time) to this dzy,dies2)emmicus, 

on all hands 

contradiftmaion 

ihejewtfb Sabbat b. 

common to both. . And whereas you reproach us fo often with Some, the £cma- 

But I do not think it Orange at all, confide ring the temper o!^ the Roman World, Rotmjh Traditions, &c. (about no tune, 
mankind, ( who are naturally more intent on things of this world, taore in your £« ? «/ry, and v ery often, though not fo often in 
than on.matters ot Religion, ) that they might by degrees grow re- mr Rt pty as if thc obfervation of the Lcrdlday or as vou call 
mifsmit, and the thing be much neglected (as was thfi JcwiUi <he 'Dominical Day, came. onely from Romifh Ufurpat '10% i (impo- 
Sabbath m Aehemabs time and long before. ) And even where* 1 0 f Laws «pon all the World) \ x% notonoufly knoWn that i/na 
is eibbhfhed by Law, there is frequent occafion of new laws to t) Tolycarpjuflin Martyr, Irenes and others, were none of the 
inforce and revive the old ones from time to time : As in EngM n ijh florid, but Greek Fathers, and antecedent to the Romilh 
(we find) it hath been. fcpation, which you own, {Enq. p. not to be aflumedin 

And this I fuppqfe was the cafe of Scotland at that time, anl vs Centuries ( divers hundred years ) after their time 
perhaps of England too ) that is, the Lords-day being too mucb fris man if e ft therefore {from your own Collection) that the 
neglected, and perhaps in fome places difufed, needed a new Lw trds-day, was thefirftday ofthe week (not the feventh) and ft 
for the better obfervation of it; as was in Aebemiabs time fa tote d, and known by that name even in the firfttentury, where- 
the Jewtfb Sabbath. But to think that the Saturday jabbato W the Apoft i es lived) (and before St y ohn wroM ^ Re £ hlioiJ \ 
been till then obferved and now to bechangd lor the Lords J* h dhath beenfo reputed ever fince, and as fuch general] y obfervca 
isafanfyofyours without any foundation. If you would IroB Chilians wherever they obferved any Sabbath at all ■ And 
hence prove any thing to the pitrpofe you fnould have fhexye^ Jon fpeak^y. p. 93. ) aUCbnftians in the World did agree, 
that, before that time they had obferved the Jcwtfb Sabbath. M t which was the Lords-day, as ) which was the Sabbath : and if 
of this, here is not the leal* miration in all that you produce. t f 0i then (as p] -, 8 ,) aU C hrijlians hitherto in the worldmufi be out 
I have nowconlider d your Colleton (becaufe you thought it ol & ir reckoning, (and to the fame purpofe 'Rep. p. 3. ) which if iv 
concernment that I mould fo do,) and have done it fairly, tabnj % good arguniciu t0 prove that cur Saturday h the Tews Sabbath, 
it juft as you give it us, without <o much as confuting any of the )rom as weI1 that 0Ur w is the L / dU 7 
Books which you cite (to fee how fair y you Mvt :tran/!ated ad Sut vhen r fay lt hath been Ve»enz& fo obferved : I do not 
reprefented whzt there you find :) which Books, if I had conful- to it 0 f wry Jingle per/on : (For no doubt but that fome perfons 
ted, I doubt not but I might there have met with much m den- w call themfclvcs thrifiians, may be fo profane as to keep no 
ganon of what you would thence perfwade ns. U ath . Q[ {o remifs ( as ou f ea J k E /^n) as KOt £ uch 

So that upon the whole matter, there is nothing appears in ltaU : And that fome others may havehad fome peculiar Whi 
ur whole Colle&on but that ^where any Sabbath (or day of t of their own;) But m church, or Society of Chri/iians ( tl 



yon 

Holy Reft) was at all kept amongft Chriftians, the Lords-day m\ 
there obferved; and whatever other days wt-rc obferved alfc («1 
manjr were in many places, and ftill are,) it was not'any where is 
oppojitton to the Lords-day, but in concurrence with it. As, amongB, 
us, there be frequent Week-day Leftures, and publick Prayers, w 
thofe to repair to whofe occafions and opportunities do permit a 
and in Colicdges^ Cathedrals, and many other Churches and Chf\ 
pels, every day ; btit no where in tppofifim to the Lmds day. 

lc 



v that 

know of) who kept any Sabbath at all, who did not obferve the 
ds-day, 

have now done with that point (and fliewed,! think, fuffici. 
y) that the Lords'-day, Rev. x JoVis (as our Records and ABs 
filament call it ) the Lords-day 7 commonly called Sunday. 

Knd I fhall here conclude that firft point, to warrant our Obfer- 
ion of that day, from thofe Many and Great Precedents that 
lave of fuch Obfervation, by- Chrijl aad his dpojtles, and the 

Kz ■ Chri* 



by the Cente 



7 6 Tk Chriftun Sdbatk Fart I 

Chrijlian Churches, both in that age f and ever Jincc, 

By the Example of Chrift, who on the day of his Refurreffa 
(which is by all agreed to be ibefirji day of the week) Treadm 
that do&rine to the Women who came to the Sepulcher, and tha 
to the two difciples going toEmmaus, and Celebrating the Lori 
Supper with them ; and afterwards affembling with bis Difciples a 
Jerufalem, Tr caching to ttem the fame do&rine, Reproving thci 
Unbelief, Confirming their Faith, Blefftng their Aflembly, GWj* 

them to the Office of Apoftles (who before were Difciples) w 
giving them InftruBions for "Planting the Chriftian Church in A 
Nations , of Gentiles as well as Jews.' , a J 

By his fecond affembling with them' on the next Lords day, lu 
ving intermitted all the intermediate days, even that, of the7^j 
Sabbath , ( as appears jfoL 21 . 1, 14. where when after thefe thim 
he a&injbewed himfelf to them at the Sea of Tiberias, 'tis exprcl 
noted , This is now the Third time that Jefus (hewed himfelf to k 
Difciples after he was rifen from the Dead ; and therefore k 
twice before, not on the Jewifh Sabbath which came betweea 
Which /^w/^allembling tfasimployed in luch Religious Exercijt 
as was the firlt. 

By the Miraculous Effufion of the Holy-Ghoft, with the Gift 
Tongues, on the day ot Pentecoft ( which was alfo the firft day of I 
week, being the morrow after the Sabbath, ) when alfo, upon Petti 
lung Sermon, were added to the Church about three Thoufand Jm 

By St, Tauh Aflenibling with a Urge Congregation of Difcipli 
then met at Troas purpofely to break bread (or celebrate the Lsri 
Supper ) as being the firji day of the week (proper for fuch religioi 
exercife, ) to them a long Sermon, and celebrating tl 
Lords Supper with them. 

By St. Tauh Dire&ons to the Churches of Galatia, and to the 
at Corinth (who had their folemn Affembhes, or gathering togethd 
in the name of our Lord Jefus, 1 Cor. ?. 4. ) that on every firft A 
of the week (x* yS*y <mCC*?at) they Qiould have a Cotte&ion for A 
Saints, 1 Cor. 16- Which doth fufficiently intimate, m mat^ 
it was, that they were wont to have fuch folemn Affcmblics. 

By St. Johns being in the Spirit on the Lords day, a day at ti 
time known by that name, even before his writing the Revelati\ 
and both in that age and ever Jince (as appears from your own Cfl 
Bions ) underfiood to be the firft day of the week, and obferved 
fuch ; the Dominical day (as you tranflate it ) and the firft day op 
week, being (to ufe your own language) by all Chriftians in the 
akgn to be the fame : and was, as fuch, folemnly obferved ; prefefl 

a 



PartlL 



The Chriftian SahUth* 



IT 

' t 



after the Apoftles time (as well as in it ) as appears from Ignatius, 
Tolycarpj Juftin&fartyr, Ircnaus, and others, who were none of 
the Romijh IVorld, and lived! before the Romijh Ufurpation, which 
was not ( as you acknowledge) lor many ages after that time. 

And all thefe precedents fo fully cleared from thofe little excep- 
tions (if I may fo call thero) that I fee no reafon in the leaft to 

Sieftion the matter of fail. Or if what I think w^and little you 
ink to he great and momentous, I cannot help it. Let the Reaaer 
judge. 

Now what was thus pra&ifed by Chrift himfelf, and by his 
Apoftles, and by thefe caufed to be pra&ifed in the Conftitution of 
the Chriftian Church, we have no caufe to doubt but that they had 
fufiicient authority for fo doing. Other wife we are at a lofs as to 
moft of what was done by them. They did appoint Deacons in the * 
Church Jerufalem, Ail 6. And, becaufe they did it, we prefume 
they had authority fo to do, Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders in 
every Churchy in their progrefs Aft. 14. (whether "Deacons alfo in 
every Church, or there anely where they faw occafion, we cannot 
tell.) And Timothy at Ephefus, by Tauh direction, <was to do the 
like there, as to Bifhops and Deacons, 1 Tim. 4. And Titus had the 
like order for Creet to ordain Elders in every City, Tit, f , j. And I 
find a Bifhcp there named, ver. 7. But whether Bijhop and Elder he 
there the fame, or how they differ, I lift not here to difpute 7 kcaiife 
it is nothing to the prefent purpofe : But of Deacons I find there 
no mention. And becaufe thefe things were done, we prefume 
they had fufiicient authority fo to do: though we do not find, 
from Chrift, any expreft Command in particular for each of thefe. 
And the like to the Corinthians for their Church Affembhes, and 
therein for Excommunicating, or delivering to Satan, of the In- 
ceftuous Corinthian. 1 Cor. f^f* And their praUtfe is to us a fuffici- - 
ent warrant for fo doing. And the like for their Celebrating the 
Lords-day. 

Now when the Lords-day was thus celebrated by thrift, by the 
Apoftles, and by the Chriftian Church then, as well as everfmce ; and 
called iyXejL&ttw the Lords day, juft in the fame form as Almt 
the Lords Supper ; I think it reaftnuble to underftand the 
fame word in the fame/ftf/? as to both : And as Amo* we^x/? the 
Lords Supper fignifies the Feaft or Supper, commanded by our Lord 
. (meaning Our Lord Jefus Chrft, as founder of the Chriftian Religion ;) 
fo j'jiW At/tut^ the Lords day fhould fignify the day commanded by our 
Lord ( in the fame fenfe ) though that command be not particularly 
recorded. Like as we* may reafcnably fuppofe, that the Wprftiip- 

Kvv 



Digitized 4>y the Center, 



dentist R 



78 The Chriftian Sabbath. Part II. 

ing of God by Sacrifice (before the Flood) was commanded, (be- 
caufe it was accepted) though that command be not recorded; and 
that thediftin&ion between Clean and Unclean Beq/ts was (before 
the Flood) commanded (becaufe approved by God) though that 
command be not recorded ; and that there was command (though 
not recorded) for taking the fire for incenfe from the Altar, elle 
Nadab and Ahihu would not have been deftroyed for offering ftrange 
fire ; and as (befide Gods reftingGtn. 2. 2,3. J You do fuppole Adam 
and Eve were commanded to r<r// alfo, though that command be not 
recorded: So, we may reafonably believe that the obfervatiort of 
the Lords day, was by our Lord commanded (becaufe fo pra&ifed 
by himfelf and the Chriftian Church) though that particular Com- 
mand be not recorded. And this, though not recorded, feems to havfe 
been then fo well known, that it was received without any fcruple 
(that we find) as well as Baptifm and the Lords Supper ; All the 
cpeftion was, .whether they mult with Baptifm xttiinCircumcifion; 
and the Jewifh Pafiover with the Lords Supper ; and, with the Lords 
day, the Jewifh Sabbath alfo. All which points the Apoftle leaves 
indifferent as to the Jews (to whom they had been a Law ) that 
each one might pra&ice according as they were perfwaded (and 
did himfelf comply therein; ) but not as to the Gentiles, to whom 
it had not been a Law. 
And this I think fufficient as to the Observation of the Lords day. 

The next point is, Whether the Lords day, thus obferved, may 
be called a Sabbath. For that is the great Obje£Hon, If fo obferved, 
and wont to be fo obferved, yet not upon a Sabbatical account, nor 
is it any where called a Sabbath. Rep. p. 3 7. 

Now if I fhould admit (which I am not forward to do) what you 
have Rep. p.jo. that all Judaical Obfervations of 2)dyr, whether 
Feafts or Fa/Is, Weekly, Monthly or Annual, were called their Sab- 
baths : Or what you have Enq. p. 93. tVben Chrijiiansdo agree upon 
a day to a/femblefor the publick worfhrp of God, there doth appear no 
great difference whether they Fa/lor Feaft upon that day: We need 
not be much follicitous about the Name. For, at that rate, no doubt 
but this may be ealled a Sabbath. And accordingly, becaufe the Pafi- 
over and Pentecoft, are called Feftivals, Lev. 23. you call them 
Sabbaths, Rep./>. 48. 

But I am not willing to admit that loofc acceptation of the Word: 
but take it to be a Sabbath in the proper fenfc of the word Sabbath 
in the Fourth Commandment : that is, the Seventh day of Reft, next 
after Six days of Labour. For fo it is, if the Lords day be duly ob- 
ferved 



1 



Digitizedfev the Center 



Part II. The Chriftiw Sdlath. 7<? 

fcrved as it ought to be ; and, as fuch, is within the profpe& of the 
Fourth Commandment, what ever Name we call it by. For, in all 
the Precedents before alleged, we do not find any other than Re- 
Jigious Exercifes therein performed, or what is confident with 
fuch. And if your rule be good, to which you refer Ejnq. p. 47. 
de non ex/ftentibus fa non apparent ibus eadem eft ratio : Or, what you 
would fujpofc. Rep. p. 33. that Paul's preaching in the Synagogue did 
comprehend his cenfeientious obferving the whole Sabbath day : We 
are then to fuppofe as well, that the whole Lords day was fpent in 
Religious Exercifef or Sabbatical imployments, (fuch as Graying , 
T re aching, Exhortations, the Lords Supptr, Colle&ions for indigent 
Saints, and other Sabbatical Employments) fince no other appear. 

But I do allow that, becaufe of the Ambiguity which would a- 
rife if the Jewifh Sabbath and the Chriftian Sabbath were indiffe- 
rently called by the fame name, without diftin&ion; therefore, by 
way of diftin&ion from the Jewifh Sabbath (which was common- 
ly underftood by that name) the Chriftian Sabbath was commonly 
called (by a diftinguifhing title) thefirft day of the weeP, or the 
Lords- day. And if you do not think fit to allow it the name of 
Sabbath, I (hall be as well contented that you call it (as the Scrip- 
ture doth, and the Chriftian Church ever lince) the Lords day. 

Yet I fhall not prefently grant you, (as Enq. p 28.) that, in the Old 
and New Tcftament the Fir ft day is never called the Sabbath. For 
there be at leaft two places in the New Teftament that bid fair for 
it, if they do not certainly fo fignify. 

One is that in ifflat. 24. 20. Tray that your flight be not in tie 
Winter, nor on the Sabbath-day. I know you would reftrain this to 
the Jewifh Sabbath onely, not extend it to that of the Chriftians 
alfo: But it {lands as fair for the Chriftian Sabbath. For it would v 
be as well a grief, to the Chriftians'to fly on their Sabbath, as for 
the Jews on theirs ; ( though not a Sin in either, in a cafe of tie- 
cef/ity.) And though the Chriftian Sabbath were not yet in ufe when 
Chrift fpakg the words, yet it would be fo before the cafe happened; 
and though the Difciples at prefent might not then be aware of 
that fenfe, it would be time enough then to underfland it, when 
there fhould be occafiofl for it. For fo it was in many other cafes. 
As Job. 2. 19, 21,22. 'Dcftroythis Temple (faith Chrift) and in three 
days I will raije it up ; meaning it of the temple o f his body ; which 
though the difciples did not preftntly undcruana,' yet when he was 
rifen from the dead, his difciples remembred that he had faid this unto 
them; and then they underftood his meaning. And Job. 13.7. (Jcfus 
to Peter, about wafhing his feet, ) fVhat I do, thou inoweft not now, 

but 



fventist Research 



So The Ckijlim Sdktk Part II. 

but thou /halt k^ow hereafter. And ver. 10,11, Te are clean (faith 
Chrift) but not all; For he {newwh Jhould betray him, and there- 
fore fatd Te are not all clean. So Job. 19. 24. They parted my rament 
among tbem } and for my vellure the/ did cafthis, and ver. 28, 19* of 
giving him gall and vinegar to drin^ and ver. 36. a bone of him Jball 
not be hoken, and 37. they /hall look on him whom they pierced; 
were not things lb imderftood till long after they were fpoken* 
And Job* 14- x6. Chrifl tells his difcipks, The Comforter, which is 
the Holy Ghojl^foall Teachyou all things and bring toyour Remem- 
brance what jhevcr I have faid unto you; and y& bring to their Re- 
membrance, as that they fliould then better under/land them, than 
when they were firft fpoken. Accordingly when he bids them Pray 
that zhtir flight be not on the Sabbath ; that is, on fuch a day as 
/hall then be Sabbath, And in the Greek it is iy oh^Sat^ on * Sab- 
bath i, not \v t$ m$$i?# on The Sabbath, You make fotnetimes a 
great matter of thedifference between a and the 7f when you think 
it for your advantage ; and you may as well take notice that the 
article The is here (in the Original) omitted ; and a Sabbath may 
as well relate to any Sabbath or day of Holy Reft, as to' the Jews 
Seventh day Sabbath. And I could cite to you the authorities (if 
that were the way of argument between von and me) of eminently 
Holy and Learned men^ who think the Chriftian Sabbath to be here 
meant, though the difeiples were not then aware of it, but fliould 
be before the time came. And I do the rather take it fo to be 7 be- 
caufe Chrifl: bids them Pray that it fliould not be on what 'fliould 
then be their Sabbath. But it is notorioufly known that it <&/hap- x 
pen on the Jews Sabbath (though not on the Lords day, or Chriftian^ 
Sabbath,) and it doth not feem likely, that Chrift would bid them 
v Pray, agairift what he knew was to com to paji, but rather againft 
what (upon fuch prayer) they might efcape ; as accordingly they 
did, their flight not happening on the Chriftian Sabbath. And it is 
noted by <Dio Cajfius who relates the Story, that their Shpcrftitious 
obferving that day (fo as not to labour on it, though in their own 
defenfe) was the occafion of its being on that day; the Romans ( be- 
ing aware of it) making their AJfault on that day. 

The other place is Afit. 13.42. When the Jews were gone out of 
the Synagogue, the Gentiles be/ought that theft words might be preach 
edto them the next Sabbath; (fo we tranflate it;) It is in the Greek 
*?f 7^ vatz^v vdCCantf. I remember you ob\$£lRep, p. 79, that if the 
Chriitians didobferve the firji day of the week, why did not the 
Gentiles delire thefe words to be preached to them the next day,. 
rather than the next Sabbath f meaning, the next Jewijh Sabbath, 

The 



DisitizecUbv the Center. 



ift II. The Chriftian Sdbtth. 8 1 

w> Gentiles (you fay) be fought that thefe words might b: preached 
, them the next Sabbath) not the next morning upon the Ftrjl day 
J-the week; but, the next Sabbath. Now, it (terns to nic much one, 
\c next Sabbath (meaning the Chriftian Sabbath,) was ihentxtaay, 
nd that on ths day they did defire to hear further dikomic on the 
dtoe fubje& "fis true that our Translators render lt'barety, tor 
%ext Sabbath; but they tell us in the Margin, that it is in the Greek, 
'lr the Sabbath bctvseen ; and To it ts, «'< t >>s w £u =^ ■ arc 
old ver. 14. t\m they (Taul and Bamtbas) at Mtwcb- in W 
Went into the Synagogue # «W«t», ou the \ Sabbat t )<■■ 

('•where obferve, that rtfcf*™ though in tht plural number, dnth ]■•- 
nify not many but oneSi&inh-day ; font is not *» a hli^'h but 
7!«>i F *, * ez£C*T*y, contrary to your obtervatibn E>tj. p.-.. 
where you fay it is no when fo u(ed ; which though you do re- 
trait Rep. p. 46. yet even here you be hankering upon it, tail the 
plural number doth -ordinarily ftgnify More than one. ) And, though 
'hit One rfav, it may well "be called rf/ {ibe^ayji, 
■Rejis) becaufe in that one day there were -to be >mre R.ji-s ih»: 
•One; a Kelt from Sin, a Rclt from Labours of divers fo«V' ro 
f osr f, and fl*r own words, and a ^ JSWi 

in Religious Exercifes, delighting our (ekes m tlx Lord, and the like. 
'Of their Sermon there (or as it is there called a Word 0/ Lxhcr- 
iahon to the people we have a large account ending at ver. +r. 
And at ver. 44. we have an account ot what palled on the next 
Sabbath, or the -en fuhig Sabbai % W i fJf «ir» <K^i?i or ttS i^Aru 
mcedi v (for 'tis read both ways w the fame fetife,] meaning! the 
next Jeviijb Sabbath ( as appears by the Company there prcfeiH 
ver. 4? . &c. ) But in the former ot thole two Sabbaths v>lxn the 
'hews were gone eut of the Synagogue, ot-Mm t/jey tvere gone out 
s/ the Synagogue of the Jews { tor the Greek will mdith rentiy bear 
■either t ran II at ion) the' Gent ties befirtghl that thofe m-Js might -be 
mvached to Them ( feparately from the Jews ) h, ri ut m^i <*>:. 
*4h the Sabbath between, or on tie intermediate Sabbiith. For as i 
Vib® doth 111 the Greek figflify the intermediate time, or the time 
befween, fo t> >£ce*nv Is the Sabbath &rtMr*-or the inter- 

mediate SMath. Now what can be that niter mediate Sabbath ( bfiv 
tween two next Sabbaths of the ]ews) on which they (hould preath 
%6 the Gentiles (in contradiftindtion to the Jews), but the Chriftian 
Sabbath on the>// «V of the week. Which by .our TranOawrs is 
m&\ enough -rfcndcTcd ftif-»W/ Sabbath fas being indeed the next 
■davVwith thisnote upon it; that I in th^ Anginal) it!»-»f 
»«rA*ef«r«. 'And even upon ihediflblutiotrof thatfirft aUcmbly 
"\ imlffh-the cofi°?t£at 'ion ms broken uf - many tf. th -Jews and. religious 

T Tra- 



'ventist I 



IT I 



82 TTfe Chrifun Sabbat k Part II, 

*Profe!ytes (not waiting till the ne xt J ewifh Sabbath) followed TvA 
ana &arnabas[iox further inflru&ion therein) who fpeaiing(ot prach 
ing ) to them } perf waded them to continue in the grace of God, ver. ^3, 
So that here,! t\\ink } the firft day is again called the Sabbath; not the 
Jewilh Sabbath, but the Sabbath between two JewifiiSabbaths. 

And I tal^e it; alio to be fo called in the Fourth Commandment^ 
Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day , or the day of Reft, that a 
iiich day as from time to time (hall be the Sabbath day. Six day: 
Jbxti thou labour and 'do all thy work; but the feventh day (after thofe 
fix days of labour) the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. This fe venth 
day was (Ifuppofe) at tkat time, the feveqth fay {som the fitfi ram* 
ingof M*twa y Exod i6. 21, 22, 15-, 26. Bfif: that it was always 1$ 
continue in courle from thtfirjl raining of Mama, I do not find j nor 
ami fure that it did fo continue even to our Saviours time, but 
might be intermitted, and forgotten during the Babylonifti Cap. 
tivity* till it was a^ain renewed by Nehemiah: And if x upon our 
Saviours Refurre&ion, another day did thenceforth become the 
Sabbath (as I think it did ;) whatever day fhould from time to time 
become the Sabhath ? that day they were to keep holy. And this 
without any change in the Command men t at all I fuppofe you do 
allow that the Affhmative part of the Second Commandment doth 
require us to obierye Gods tnfiitutedVfQTfhip, (or, that he fhould 
be worfhiped in fiich manner as himfclf appoints,) and confequent- 
jy , the Levitical Trieftbood and Sacrifices fo long as they fhould con- 
tinue; as being Gods then-inftituted fForjhip^ as £nf. p. 68, But 
when God, iniiead thereof, gave us a more fpiritmi Miniftry (as 
you own it to be,) That then ceafed, and This began, to be Gods in. 
ftituted Worfhip, and did {without any alteration of that Law at 
all) fall under the Second Commandment, as, before, the; other did* 
Xn like manner, the feventh Commandment, Thou Jb*lt not commit 
adultery \ binds the IFomanto this Husband \ but if this husband be 
dead and fhe marry to another, the fame law (not one j*t or tittU 
altered.) binds her to this other husband; as the Apoftle argue* 
Mom. y 2, 3 . For, though the Caje be altered, the Law is ftilJ the 
fame. And in like manner > if the Lords day become now the 0ri~ 
ftians iiy of holy Reft^ (as we think it doth) this now is the Sabbath 
of the Fourth Commandment, as much as the Seventh day from the 
firft raining of Manna was before. Like as the fecond husband (after 
the death of the firft) becomes the Husband in the Seventh Com- 
mandment, as much as the Firft was while he was living. And the 
Lords day is now as much the feventh day after the fix days of Labour } 
as wasthit other from the firft raining of Manna. But whether 
this or that or neither, b$ the feventh day in cmrfe from the firj 

Crc- 



&rt IL The Chiftian Sabbtik 83 

ja/i^ncither you nor I know \ nor is it neccflary that we fhoulck 
As to whzt you object hereupon {Sep. p. 1, 3. and very often 
' srward to the like purpofe ) / do not know nor can know what 
of the wee {Sunday is > why fhould I write a hook for the obferva* 
ji of a day which it is mpojfible to know ? My Anfwer is, I know 
m well which day of ourlVeek_n is; and write for the obftrva- 
" 1 of this day : But what day of the week it is in a continual cir* 
^tim of weeks from the Creation, I do not know (nor do you) and 
iercfore for fuch firft or feventh day, I do not write : and ii you 
Kite for fuck feventh day, you write for you know not what. And 
*r rite for that Lords-day, which I take to be fo in a continual fjc^ 
ffion from Chrifts time ; fo far as that can be known : that is (as 
E fpeak Rep. p. 3.} fVhat allChriftian af?d Hebrew Churches in the 
'orld agree to be it : Or ( E*f. p. -78.) if all Jews and Chrijiians in 
world be not out in their reckoning ■: Or if that be it, which you 
(Ertf. p. 9j,) all the Chrijiians tn tbtWorld agree to be it. That 
fofar as we may truft to an Univerfal , Tradition in a matter ot 
, For this Unfacrfal agreement^ is but Untverfdl Tradition and 
So more: And more than this you cannot have, nor do pretend to 
iave, for determining, which is^our Seventh day. And therefore 
Mid you no wrong in faying {Difc. p. 1.) that ywbave no other waf 
than Common Tradition ) whereby to guefi which is the firft or 
ienth day in fuck circulation even from Chrifts time, (though when 
„ucite my words, you think fit to leave out other than common 
'adition. ) So far as this can aflure us we arc affured; but beyond 
•is, neither yotfnor I can be fure which is the day. Nor do I 
i»k it much material, whether we be or be not raiftaken therein, 
weobferve the day which is fo reputed According as before I 
ive ihewed, of the Jews Taftover and New*meons. For (accord- 
ing to the method they are faid to havo oMerved for determining^ 
fee day of the New- Moon, and confequeatly the Day and Month of 
ic Taft over thereupon depending, viz. by the firft fight of the 
Koon after the Change,) it was a rare cafe not to mifs of the true 
iy, ( for 'tis very rare to fee the Moon on the true day of the- 
Itw-Moon ;) and, in cafe the Full-moon was near the Equinox, 
Hmght be equally uncertain, which was the Firft Month: Yet the 
hfi-over y and the New Moons; were Religioufly OMerved, on the 
deputed Day, of the reputed Month; and it was, I doubt not, as well 
Kcepted as if on the juft day : and fo would be our Lards day, if 
teffibly we [hould miftakt, in the common Tradition. And the cafe 
J- juft the fame with you as witfc us, as to this point; for you a& 
foidfldixi guejfwg which day is a feventh in courfc from the Crc- 

L % at ion i 



Dieitized/by the Center fi 



jyentisj: Research. 



8 4 



The CkriftiM Sabbath. 



Part I?., jftrt II 



Tk Chrijluti Sabbtth: 



1 



ation; and with more (Jncertaint^rhzn we do in judging which is the fl<befide Bnptifm) to ufe Circumcifion ; or ( beiide the Supper ) 
Lords day in, a continual fuccellion from Cbrifts time; of which you to ufe the Jewifh Tajimr : Yet I think it then was /au/if/ tor a 
tdl us thzx alljews andChrijlians in the JfW</areagreed,which is the [, 7^ to ufe both (if they were fo pcrfwaded) till by time, and lei- 
r £fominic&I day. And it is much jnorc likely that our common tjradi,, fure, they [hould come better to underftand their Chrijiian Liberty, 
tiort, as to the Lsirds day,{\nct Chiifts time,doth not deceive us, than ► Which your felf 3 I think, will not deny. But 1 do not think 



ymrs for ihefeventh day hi courfe from thefirft reation. For,by your 
f>v si eonrUlion.no nation but the Jews (if they) obferved this jhenth 

fiom the C reation j nor yet ( f or ought appears ) did even the Jews 
reckon their :time by weeks till after *their coming out of Egypt: 
Whereas,. fince.Ch rifts time, and the planting of Cnnlhanity, 'ti$ 
the general way ot reckoning every where;, and if one nation 
fh-niid chance to mistake ox forget it, others would r^uty it.. 



Ike Jews (and much lefs the Gentiles ) to be under an Obliga- 
tion \o to do. And I fuppofe you do allow this alfo ; For you think 
[Enq. p, in. ) that Taul did keep the Jewifh Fafs-ovcr, but :p. njj 
that he was under no Obligation Jo to do 

ji And I take the cafe of the Jewift Sabbnth to be jtift the fame. 
^Thofe of the Jews who were zealous of the Law, thinking tbc Mtv 
Xaick Law was yet in force as to tncumufuu and other Rites 



as 



well as to their Sabbath, did think tbemklves obliged (though in- 
This point being thus difpatched; It remains to enquire, Whc- j deed they were not, otherwife than by the miflake of an Erroneous 
ther { befide the Lords-day) we are to obferve the Jewjh Sabbath Con faience} to obferve Circumcifion and their Sabbat h } together with 
alio. 13c not offended (as iometimes you fcem to be Rep. p. $\*$$) and the Lords*day 

that I call it the \jfavifb SubbatL For' I find, yon can alio fo call it; 



\:>Enq. p. 38, The Jews Seventh day fahbath ; and p. 66. thejewrfi 
Sabbath; and p: 74. the Jewifh Seventh-day fahbath: and elfewhere. 
Nor do I mean any hurt in focalling it.; orthereby to Reproach 
the day. For I would not Reproach, either Circumcifion, or the 
Tafl over,, or the Levitical Vriefthood; or any of the Sacrifices, or 
Cemnontes of the Ceremonial Law, which was then the appointed 
Service of God, though now it be not, I ufe itoncly as a dijlin* 
Sine mme from dritot iht Lords- day. For I take this mw to be 1 
Safybath day, and the Seventh day fabbat^ (intended in the Fourth 
Commandment,) as much as the Jews Seventh-day-Sabbath, tlm 
was : that is ( not onely A Seventh-day, as you ufe to diftmguift, 
but) The fevenththp after ftp day^#f^bmr;<T\\vu§h poflibly not 
the fextnth in courfe from thzfift Creation, nor perhaps the feventb 
m courfe from the ft ft rawing of Manna. . ' . ' ' 

Hut the Lords -day, uvj^and is to be Obferved ; I think 1 have fuf- 
fiViently*fl]ewecl already. As to that other quefiion,whether the Jem. 
ifh Sabbath ought to be obferved alfo : You feem to anfwer for me* 
Enq |\ 4 6 . Air are there two Weekly days Jet apart by God for holy Wofr 
/hip, and fo Ithinhjhis quefi 'ionneeds no furt her Labour. And Ay>.p.j}> 
1 htownonehasyet imagined that Ptuthndthe Chrijiians kept mo Sab- 
bath days in one Week, And yet again Re/i.p.66. 1 tafc as agreed, we are 
not to keep two days in a Week. All which are your own words. 

But t think fit to anfwer it a little more dfftin&iy. I would di< 
ftinguifh, between what is wwovj 7)uty, and what might then by 
xhe % Jafrfiilly be done, I do not think it is mvc our 'Duty 

: (be 



And thofe who did not think them, 
ifclves fo Ob/fged } did yet thu k it Lawful fo todo T ( as is undeniable 
the Cafe ot 'Baul. ) And it was not only Lawful but Commtndar 
Ji/tf, to take the opportunity of a ptvblick Coucourfe whether of jews 
or Gentiles, as well on that as on any other day,to preach to them the 
Cofpel of Chrirt. For»fo we find they did, not onely on the Sabbath, 
but daily in the Templc x d&. 146. Jc7. 5*41. and in the Market daily 



yicl* 17. 17. and in Areopagus, m*3iar.s-h}Uy ver* n. And no man 
iioubts, I think, for need doubt ) but that we niay-lawfully meet on 
Mother days than the Lord f day for the ff^orfhip of God. 
T~ You tell us indeed Enq. p. ixi*] that on the other fix days we 
jjtre Commanded to Labour ; and complain p. j 3 ju ( as an incioach- 
menton our working time) that' this part of the Fomih Command 
\/Jix days fhalt thou labour and do all that thou baft to do} is in effect 
much laid afide (by appointing the Service of God on fome of thofe 
K days;) and Rep. p, 6. the other fix Allowed for Work^ or rather 
.wherein we are Commanded to n-ori. But, I hope you do not think, 
•Ve arc fo Commanded thep to work, as that we are Fotbid to Vray^ 
(ox to hear a Sermon y on one of thofe days. If God do not ( in the 
: foimh Commandment) command any other day (to al! in general;) 
lA.yet neither doth he there forbid it. You may remember that, in 
I the Mofaick Law, befides the commanded fervices, there were 
Fue-wiB Offerings that might be offered. And (whatever your 
opinion beagainn meeting twice in public^ for Satbath \fervices on 
the Sabbath-day,) I fhould hope you would .think it allowable ( for 
; thofe whofc other occafions ma-y Well permit it) to attend a Week- 
day Leflwe 7 wheieit may conveniently be had. And the Apottles, 

no 



Dieitizeciby the Center m 



Biventist Research" 



U - Tk CbrifiinSMtib. Part IX 

no doubt, wh'ofc daily bufincfs it was to preach the Gofpel, might 
(on this day as well as any other ) take the opportunity, ot the 
Jews meeting in the Synagogue (as well as of the Athenians meet- 
ing in the Market A& 1 7. 1 7.) to preach the Word to thcra And 
I think it might be as then (though not a Duty) for the 

Believing Jews, 10 meet on their Sabbath^ as it was to pradiceCrr- 
cumoifim, if they were fo perfwaded. But to impofe it on the Gen- 
tiles as a Zto#swa$ (I think) not then to be done,and much lefs w. 

By Gentiles I do not hear mean Circumcifed frofelytes; for thefe 
(though naturally Gentiks and not of the feed of Abraham) did (by 
being circumcifed) become naturalized Jews, and thereby members 
of the Jewifh Church (and might eat the 9afiover) as well as if 
they had been Native Jews y Exod. ia. 48. But I mean thofe Chru 
(Hon Gentiles (yet nnrirenmcifed) concerning whom the fuejlion 
now was whether they ought to be circumcifed and obferve the Law 
of Mofes, Aft i,|,if Gal.f. 1,2,3. Fottomtjews (or?*- 
daizing Chrijfians) taught the Brethren, that Except they were 
cumcifed, after the manner of Mojes, they could not hejaved: As if 
Salvation were fo 0} * the Jews, as that, without being brought with- 
in the rale of the JewifhChurch, they could* not be faved by their 
dMeffas. 

Somewhat confonant to your doftrine, Enq. p. 79. that the Jews 
in Egypt, was the whole vifible Church of Chrrji in The World {I 
fhouM have faid the Church of God, in con trad iflinihon to the 
Chrifiicn Church: Nor wduld I have faid the whole Church.) That 
they were a considerable fart, and that they were more peculiarly 
fo, becnufe of the promife made to Abraham and his feed, of which 
Circumcifion was *S/gn; thus much I had granted, Wife, p. 60. 
with which you are not fatisfied, Jiep, p. . But that they (as the 
feed of Abraham) were the whole vifible Church of God, I cannot 
allow. I think that dMetchizedeJt (a Trieft of tfje mojl High God) 
whoever he was, 2nd his people, were jter/ ol Gods Vilible Church; 
though not of ihzfeedof Abraham, nor circumcifed (that I know) 
or required fo to be. And the like of Lot ( righteous Lot, though 
not circumcifed, that I know of, nor required fb to be, nor any 
member of the Je with Church,) and his Family, and his pofterity 
(fo long as they continued to wor{hip,the true God ;) and Abrahams 
kindred at Ur and Haran; who though they were not of the f eed of 
Abraham (nor incorporated into his family,) yet 1 do not know that 
they had caft off the Worfhip of the true God ( though perhaps 
oihcrwife faulty ;) and all the Potterity of Abraham by keturah; 

man? 



irt II. Tk ChrtjHan Sdhath. Sy 

Miy of whom, no doubt, did for a long time continue to worftiip 
t true God : who though of Abrahams pojierity yet were no part 
f the Jewifh Church in Egypt y whom yet ( £n$. p. 75). £ep. p. ^2.) 
u wouldhave to be the w/Wf Church. The like ot Jethro (IVitffc, 
Prince of Midian) ot whom we have a huge account JEW. 1. 
d Exod. r8. wasdoubdefs (as thence appears ) zgoodman, and a 
horjhipe r of the true God; but the Midianites, ( as well as the Edo~ 
itts, the Moabites, the Ammonites, the Amakhites, and others,) 
e ftill contradiftinguiftied to the ffraeiites brought out of Egypt. 
d no doubt but many of Jethro $ people, as well as him/elf, were 
iTorlhipers of the true God, and part of Gods Vifible Church. And 
I judge the like of Aner, and EJbcol, and Mamre, { Ahams Cm- 
federates Gen. 14. 1 3, 14, ) though they lived in Canaan, as he did. 
And there is no doubt of Job, and his three friends, (who feem all 
be Princes, or Great men, and to have great Dependences) and 
} ihu (who was a fourth,) were part of Gods vifible Church; and 
my of their people or dependents; but no part of the Ifraelites 
jf Egypt * though contemporary with them. Nor can it be faid of 
Ipy of them, that God brought them out of th$ land of Egypt, out 
if the houfeof bondage. And 1 do not know but that Balaam (though 
otherwilca badman^ as Cain alfo was,) rnieht be a Worfhiper of 
the true God. And the Kenites alfo* (of whoft kindnefs to the If- 
raelites we find mention, Judg. 4. 11, 1 7. ) And the Widow cf Sa- 
vtpta (a Zidonian ) 1 King. 17. And Naamatt the Syrian, 2, King. 
15-^17. who owns that there is no other' God in all the earth but the 
6W of Ifrael, and would thenceforth, offer neither burnt -offerings 
[nor Sacrifice to any otfcr God, but unto the LO R*D ( Jehovah-) And 
Ifee no caufe to queftion it, but that many others of thofe who 
re Profe/yti Tort*, though not Frofelyit Faderis ( as they ufe to 
fediffinguifhed) weregtW men, zndworfhipers of the true God, and 
•ambers of Gods vifible Church, though not of the Jewifh Church. 
Such I fuppofe was the Centurion Luk, 7. who though he loved their 
Wim and built them a Synagogue, ver. y. yet was not ot the Jewifh 
Church, as appears vet. p. / have not found f$ great faith, no not in 
%r*el And the fame is manifeft-in Cornelius: A^jho was a devout 
Itof, and one that feared God, and all his houfe, Act. 10. 2. ( and, a~ 
Hongfi the reft, his two hou/hold fervants, and the devout jouldierwho 
ffdted on him, that were lent for Teier, ver* 7.) with many of hh 
mdred and new friends ^ vcr. 24, 33, 44, 46; and was one whole 
**ytrs werje heard and his alms were had m memorial before God,vtx* 
L31. ajuftman, and one that feared God, and (though not a Jews) 
if good refort among all the nation of the Jews, ver. ix and who was 

ther«* 



Digitized Jby the Center 



dentist Research^ 



88 The ChriJiUn SMtth. Part II. 

therefore (even before his becoming Chriftian upon Peter's preach- 
ing) one of Gods vifible Church {as wercthofc others alio with 
h& -\ Hot a few. nor in communion with the Jcwifb Church; 



lawful for a man 
to have 
not the 



'art H Tkc Chrijtkn Sdfah. % 9 

W^l °J.} he / ee ^ D f Graham, but common to aJJ that believed, to 

iTLf {^A A r Mdw ° yi of Nation. 

.nd thofc who did f 0 , were part of Gods vifible Church, though 
lot Jews, unincorporated into their Church. So that thofc r£* 
r ftp were not the wyfe/e Church of God, as you would 

7T » Vni', J 00 ™ 3 " onel y ^okwhojoynedthemfehes 
t'JW f 35 lf none but fuch might be favedby their 

Mejjuh , though otherwife /br-Mg c«/ andferving him,) You per. 
21y fall m with thofe Judamng Chrijlians (Adl ic, i Gal. y i V 
fto rtf Sr^rw, £*c#/ /f fe circumci fed after the manna of 
yes, ye cannot be faved. v 
And therefore I am ftill of opinion ( notwithftanding your 
jinking otherwife) that what God fays to the yews, as wejj of 
fcumtfa, « the Jewijh Sabbath ( on the fcventh dav from the 
£tt raining of Manna) as a Sign, or Ovr«w/ between htm and 
p*, is intended as a dtftinffive mark given to the Jews, as Gods 
it was the *>?re peculiar People (not as the whole vifible Church) r* 

/ 0 other Nations. Of Circumcifion he fays to Abraham 
?V y I" 7 , «r Covenant between me and thee, and 

■ n tilt l**ft >ffy*»- them - / 1 ^ - ' 

. And Rom. 4. 9, 10, it, 
,„ that this blefjednefs cometh not upon the 

Ctrcumcificn onely (on the Jew.m Church onely) but upon .the Un- « Mievers of aU nmens,in all ages, from the beginning of the 

circumcifiohalfo^ for that faith Has reckoned to Graham for rightt- t0 ™? ™do} it, to diftingutfk them from the difobedient to Gods 



him ;) yet not a Jew, nor in communion j-^'j** 
bn t of another natron, with whom it was thought unlawful ft 
that ts a Jew to keep company } or (Tome unto him, ver. z8. that is, 
familiar convert with him. So that the Jewijb Church was 
IVholc vifible Church of Cod. And this Peter acknowledge th ver. 34, 
IS. of a truth /perceive that God is no refpeHer^of perfons ; but in 
tverynation, he that fearcth hitnandwrkethrightcoufnefs is accepted 
of him. Nor was this then a New truth (how contemptibly foever 
the Jews thought of other nations ) but is cited from &ffl\ 1017/ 
1 3, 19, Arid accordingly fitter (at ver. 4-, 48.) admits them all to 
bhrijlian Bapiifm, without requiring them firft to be circumcifed 
or become Jevcs 
I 

Gentiles , 

cmmirtMe oracks of God, whereby they had better opportunity 
of knowing his will ; But as to the Rule of Safottw, it was the 
time to bot'h ; as he there argues ver. &c. 7ft rtghtemf'nefl of 
God.hy faith mJefuS Chrifi isnnto all and upon all that k//o*(whether 
Jew or Gehnlc) for there is no difference. And Rom. 9, 10 s 
\z, j 1 he argues at I nge 



become 

do not deny but that the Jc^s had many advantages above the 
ttiks fh. Taul argues Rom, ? . t x \i> chiefly, becanfe to them were 

. :... .l*L„ .~..~L, *f r:*J i.-k,>r/>li« fhf v hnrl hotter onnoftunitv 



'not when he was-in Circumcifion; but in Uncncamcifim ; W J*-,' And wr. io,n 7*m is my covenant which* ye Jk*U keep > be- 
herecckedthf fign ofCircnmcifm, a feahf the righfeoufnefs of faith me and you and thy jeed after thee (is this meant of M Na- 
which he had being yet Uncircumcifed ; th*t he might be the Father «««' to the fTortds end ? to wit) every male child among/I you /had 
^that believe, though they be not circumcifed, that rigbte- ' 



,~ . n I ' " vv v \,utn+ wrwriVii. VQU Wail 

of all them that believe, though they be not ctrcurftcifed, that ngbtt- fcircumcijed and it fhaUbe a token of the Covenant betwen me and 
mthefs'mkbt be imputedto tlfem alfo. W\ tnat } s j iou the feed of Abraham ; for ao other were to be 

J And I Oiould have thought vofa might have been of the fame MrcurociJed, unlefs incorporated with them.) And ver. ia. mv 

■ Covenanted he myourfiefh an everlafiing Covenant, (not as if Or* 
*maM r were to be for ever obligatory; but,whilc things continued 
in that State of diftinSion between Jews and Gentiles.) And 
jews or GentHes then, living and dying impenitentfy, had not Satvatu IMe manner concerning the Jevoijb Sabbath, Exod. ?r. 13. My 
on by tbe MeJJJaW- Thofe of Tin'* or the Genriks then, who y/md Maths ye Jhatt keep, for tt is a Sign between me and Tou ( that i£ 
themfehes to lhHord. to ferve himjmd aemai^l And it ia I ^ the Children of Ifrael to whom it was'fpoken) throughout your 
fee not why they flib\rfd riot be thought p-art of God's vjhble wr^w. And ver. 16 the Children of Ifrael fliaU keep the Sab- 

«/ Covenant and ver. in.. It is a Sign between me and the ChU- 
en of Ifrael fw even (which plainly fliews, who were meant by 

ft «/^f^ 20, ^'^ IO ';V 3 ' 16 ' 18 '^ 20 - Sonofmal, 
*ak to the Elders of Ifracl- In the day when / chafe IfrteL and 
Clmca , M ; i,f te j 



lee not wny tney wuinu-irov m-w^n.-j"..;- 
•Church. 'Tis true thtr, without being ■Ciramcijed thcy 
iiot tat the T*ft-wer Exod. iz. 18. becanfe not of the w 
Church 1itu it doth ndt therefore follow that they were not < 

So that SaK-atrori, even ! then, was not confined X#yet «7<»'{ 



Digitizedfby the Center 1 



lyentist Research 



The Ckriftkn Sabhatk 



Part II. 



hought them into the IVildernefs. / gave them (in the Wilder 

nefsl my Sabbaths to be a Sign between me and them (who are thele 
but thole that xvere brought ought of Egypt,) but the bmje of If- 
tad rebelled agawftmein the midernefs y (are thefe all true be- 
lievers from the beginning of the wor!d,to the worlds end ?) ~~ and 
my Sabbaths iky polluted; _ But I '/aid unto their Coildren in tk 
mldernefs, - walk in my Statutes - and hallow my Sabbaths, and 
they (hall be a fign between me and you, &c. Who can thefe be, but, 
the people of Ifrael as contradiftinguilhed from other people ? the 
as contradinguilhed from the Gentiles ! Yet when you tell 
us from hence {En ? . p. 26.) and particularly from Exod 31. 13, 

people, to dtflmguitt) his people from others ; you think much {Rep. 
a U that I ihould underfiand it p. tfo.) of the people of If 
rati: thouqh, in the place by you cited (£W. 3«- H-) It J bc ": 
prcfly faid, // is a fign between me and the Children of Ifrael. And 
therefore (whatever You mean by it) the meaning of the : Text 4 
W i tfw/. Like to that of Exod f |. 7. ?3* <*» 
* difference between the xjEgytians and Ifrael 
And here I think it is not improper to take notice of that 10 
lemn CUufe (which we often meet with, both as to Circuvtcifion, 
and the lewifh Sahbath, as well as other Rues) namely inyourgene* 
rations, Gen, 17. 7 / will efabhjb my Covenant, between me and 
thy feed after thee [in their generations] for an everhfling Covenant^ 
iibe a God to thee and thy feed after thee. And ver. p. Thou Jbatt 
keep my Covenant therefore, thou and thy feed after thee [m thetr ge- 
nerations.] And vir.i 12. He that ts eight days old fiall be cirennt- 
cif'edamomSjoUyfvery male child [in your generates,} Where I take 
the words Inyw generations, to be (verba mmuentia) Words of A- 
batemtnt. An Everta&ing Covenant, bat, to whom? To the Seed 
cf Jbrahm (not to all the world.) And how length your Gene- 
rations ; fo Jong as you and they continue to be zfeparate generate* 
diftinguifiud from the reft ol the World ; not when that watt J 
Separation fhail be taken away. So concerning the Manna, bxod. 
1 1 2 2. Fill an Omer of it to be kept [for your Generations ,] and m 
2 X Lay it up before the Lord, to be kept [ for your Generations.) And 
J their Sabbaths, Exod. 31. 13. My Sabbath ye {hall keep, for it ts * 
fan between me andyou{throughout your Generations.) Audv iWT 
I he Children of Ifrael /hall &p tk Sabbath, to obferve the Sabbat* 

[through 



Part It, The Chriftim Sdhth. 91 

[throughout their Generations,) for a perpetual Covenant ; it is a fign 
between me and the Children of Ifrael for ever, 'Tis fo, a perpetual 
-Covenant, as yet to be confined to the Children of Ifratl ( as Cir- 
Jtutncifion was to the Seed of Abraham,) and while they continu- 
ed a feparate Generation from the rell of Mankind. I fpeak ftill of 
Tthe Jewfh Sabbath ( from the firft raining ot Manna,) not of what 
might be afterward appointed in the room of that, when that 
:;ffiould ceafe. 

But when you tell us ( Hep. p. ri- } that when you fay To di/lm- 
guifh Gods people from others, 2 our meaning was and is throughout, 
that the Sabbath ( this Saturday Sabbath jwas and is a perpetual fign 
and Covenant with all True Ifraelites y that is, all the Believers of 
all Nations, in all Ages, from the beginning of the Word to the End 
tftt, to dijimgwfnjuch from the T>ifobedient to Gods Law : Pray 
rconfider, how unkind you are to ail the Chriftian World except 
I yourielf (and fome few more ) whom, becaufe they do not ob- 
TTcrve your Saturday Sabbath, you exclude from the number ot 
Gods 'People, of true Ifraeliles, of true Believers ; and rank them 
with the df obedient to Gods laws, whom you elfcwhere call ( with 
great difpleafurc) the Jnomisls y the Ungodly, with other the like 
hard terms. Is this agreeable to that Candour you promifed ( Enq. 
i 3, 4, ) to the Advocates for the Firflday ? Muft wc All be exclu- 
Jed from* the the number of Gods people ? I fliould have thought, 
'that, when you complain of Heats > and carrying it High) which 
{ you fay ) you much difiike, beeaufe/0« ore pzrf&aded that many of . 
ifoth fides (whoever do miBake ) do confeientioufly mislake : you would 
;iiave had fo much charity for us, as to think fome of lis may yet be 
"{pods People ; and forimch modefly as to think the mislake may 
poflibly be on/<wr fide, rather than on the whole body of Chrifh- 
ains ( fome very few excepted ) who Religioufly obferve the 
Lords-day. 



But whatever thofe Jews or Judamng Chri/lians did pretend ; as if 
Salvation were not to be had out of the Jewifh Church, (as being 
the wfole Church of God) and therefore, the Gentiles, if they ^ 
pe£ed Salvation muftfirflby circumcifionbt b rough within the pale 
of that Church, (and c6nfequently obnoxious to the whole Mofaid 
Lawy Gal. j\ 3.) The Apoftles doftrinewas otherwife, that the 
pale was now taken nway T the inclofure laid open and difparked, the 
wall of partition broken down } and what advantages had before been 
peculiar to the Jews, were now/« common to Gentiles alfo, without 
becoming members of the Jewifh Church. And therefore he doth 
R*h, 0 M 2 



92 The Chrifi'un Sabbath. Part II. 

exhort them to ftand faft in the liberty wherewith Chrijl had made 
them free, and not to be int angled with the yoke of bondage to the 
Jewifli Church, Gal. $. i. What was before zfign or mari^ofdi. 
Jlinffion between Jew and Gentile, being now at an end at lead as 
to the Gentiles, however the Jews might yet be permitted, if yet 
unfatisfied, to continue their former practife; without impofing 
it on the Gentiles, (to whom before it had not been a law : ) And 
the fame was the fenfe of the Synod ofjerufalem, k&.i$. and of 
James with the brethren A& 21. 17. 

Now I fuppofe you will not fay,, that the Gentiles, before this 
time, did obferve the Jewijb Sabbath, (fo that, to them, it was a 
new thing, ) For you tell us again and again that they {all nations, 
Sep. p. 74.) worjhipedthe Sun upon Sunday; their day of Worfliip 
(fuch as it was) was on another day. 

And^ though I am not of your opinion , that they did (any of 
them) worfhip the Sun upon Sunday any more than on another day, 
or that the of Sunday (or of the other week-days) was then 
known ; Yet I do believe they did notobfe/ve the Jewijb Sabbath; 
becaufe this wasaj%»of z perpetual Covenant, between God and the 
Children of Ifrael, Exod. ji. 16, 17. (as, in a peculiar manner, 
their God, m contradifhndlion to other Nations, ) as was Cirtum- 
01 token of " fuch Covenattt between God and the feed of 
graham, Gen. 17. p, u. /nd though you are not willing to un- 
der/land it of God and the Children of Ifrael ( though it be exprefly 
laid io, m thofe very words, between me and the Children of Ifrael) 
but between God and hisTeople (from the beginning of the world to 
toe end thereof, ) Yet when you do contend alio that this people were 
then the whole, vifible Church; if but a diftinaion between God and 
01s people, youjnuft admit that the Gentiles ( who were then not a 
people, 1 Pa. 2. ic. or not his people, Rom. o. i T , 16.) did not ob- 
lerve it, (clfc how could this be a. ftgn, or token of dtHinciion, even 
between God and his people f) So that the Jewijb Sabbath was "to 
them, a new. thmg. And your felf own it fo to be Rep. p. s 1 . That 
U was then New to. the Heathens I agree, be your own words. 

Now, as to fuch new things to be introduced on the Gentiles, 
from the Jewifh Church, we find it refblyed on a folemn Argu- 
ment by the Synod at Jerufalem, Act is. not to put a yoke upon the 
neck of the dijciples, which from the Gentiles are turned unto God, 
yer. 10, ip. Itfeemedgood (fay they) unto the Holy Gboil and tons, 
to lay upon you no greater burdens than thofe necejfary things, That ye 
abflain from meat offered to Idols, and from blood/ and from things 
Jtrangied, and from fornication / frw which if ye keep your fehesye. 

Jhai 



(Part II. The ChrijlUn Sabbath. gJ 

tall do well ver. 18, ap. But there is nothing of the Jewilh Sab- 
fatb an* ngf thefe necejfary things. And to the fame purpofe 
Karnes and all the Elders, aflembled zijeiufalem, A& 21.18 wnere' 
hey tell Paul, that many thoufands of the believing Jews, who were 
tl zealous of the Law, had been informed, that he taught all the 
Jews which are amongft the Gentiles to forfake Mofes, fain* That 
[they ought not to circumcife their children, neither to wok after the 
Cujiomes, ver. 20, it. ( of which Cujlomes, that of the Jewilh Sab- 
huh was certainly one.) And do advife him ( for the removing 
pi that prejudice, and acquitting himfelf from that falfc informa- 
tion ) to purify himfelf together with /ww men which had a Tow on 
Wen, to fhew that himfelf ( being a Je w ) did walk orderly and keep 
v>e Law, vet. 2j, 14. But as touching the Gentiles which believe 
lay they ) we have written and concluded, that they obferve no fuch 
'hngfaveonely that they keep themfelves from things offered to idols, 
tdfromblood, and from things jlr angled, and from fornication, ver. is 
thy thefe particular things were infified on as necejary at that 
:afon, 1 lilt not now to difpute, becaufe I would not fuggefl new 
atter of difpute between me and you, (which yet I think is there 
timated, at Ail. is. 20, 21. compared with Gen. p. y. which was 
[precept ancienter than Circumcijton, and 'the Mofaick Law ) But 
Sere is no mention of the Jewifh Sabbath, as necejary to the Gen. 
ties, 1a either place : which certainly would have been, if necefla- 
' for them to obferve ; it being to them a new thing, out of the 
11 of Mojes, and which was before a diftinftive ftgn or token 
fculiar to them, and not obferved by any other. And certainly as 
(onfiderable ( if not more f than abjlaining from things Jlrangled, and 
\om blood; which perhaps You do not think to be now neceflary 
■ You'll fay perhaps, that neither is there mention of the Lords 
i&y True : nor yet of Baptifm, or the Lords Supper, nor of 
trdaining Elders in every Church : Becaufe thefe were Chrijlian 
mjittutions ; and no part of what was there in aueflion. For it was 
Dot doubted whether the Chrijlian Gentiles fhould obferve the 
Chrijlian Injlitutions ; but, whether (with them) they were bound 
to obferve alfo the Mofaick^ Law ; lor that was the point then in 
ueftion,^?. is- i,s, C, 24. There rofe up certain of the Sett of the 
HfriJfU, which believed, faying, That it was needful to circumcife. 
\m, and to command them to keep the Law of Mofes. And the 
^ftles and Elders came together to confider of This Matter, (not 
put the Chriftian Inftmuions ) Where, by the.Law of Mofes, is 
it meant onely, what was newly appointed bv Mofes, after their 
*ing out of Egypt ; but it looks back as far as Circumijion, 

(which 



the Center 



[ventist Research 



L The Chrifiian Sabbath. Part II. 

( which ^as^ldcr than Mofes) and to the Law given to Atajcoft. 
cern L Blood, and, I fuppofe, the Law of Sacrifice (wb* ™ 
ode tUeuher: For all thefe (fo far as they _«rc new £ 
•them ) came to the Gentries as /rw* Mofes, that is from the t Jkw* 
Church confiituted by Mofes, and therefore is called the Law J 
And, of all that is here enjoyed on the Gcnules out of tb,s 
'Law MbM thc 7tvujb Sabbath is no part. 1 
Now this, I think, (as lometimes you fpeak) goes* greet**? 
in tnecafe. You do not pretend ( for ought I fee) that any other 
*atidn'thah 'the Jives ( and their Profelytes ) did then tfl*r**d* 
■Jevcifo Sabbath : For you grant it ( £«y. p. i6\ Ap. p. J i. ) to be a 
<flf?/W»t* atorf, or/&», it not between God and Jbi Children of If 
rael at leaft fcrtttttw God and his People ( which ^fl/Jf, I prefntne 
vou'do not take to be thc Unconverted Heathens ; and thertore : not, 
ovthem, ob'ferved.) Tis true that the Heathens did knm ol the 
fas!® Sabbath, and of their Circumcifion too ; but they did fepX- 
Wdefpfe both, [Recutitaque Subbata pallent,) novoi/trve cither. 
And therefore, if it were now to be newly impofed upn them, 
Wttfucfrthat it Ihould not be recommended as one ot thole ne- 
ve [fary things which it. was fit for them to oMerve, . as well las 
abftinence h orn Blood, and things ilrangkd. Which when we find it 
Vas not, I think we have realon to conclude, that though the Jems 
were permitted to continue the pra&ice of That, and of Circucijion, 
yet neither on} nor the other to be imt>ofed upon the Gentiles ; who 
had Baptifm in Head of one, and the Lords day inftead ol the 
other : as they had the Lords Supper inftead of their Pafs-over,xtA 
i%oet : excellettt Mimftry inftead of the Levitical Puelthood Mean 
whiF'^d*'^^* againft the SMath of tbxJWb Com- 
mandment {the fevcoth day after fix days ot labour, as is the Lords 
day) but the lewip Sdbbaib ( the feventh day from the firlt rain- 
ing' of Manna, or that of the Jewifh week ) being impofed upon the 
Grr.riier together with that of the Lords-day. 

And therefore when you fay ( Rep. p. j>. ) that / there waif ™ 



Hill >uv4 ia> v *±*r* r' j r". I ~ \U\JEy VV **IIT»\.f 111 

it is Vour miftake. This feventh-day SabbatbX 
Vi$%-A& w>ich 'you Meafe 
9 the Sabbath\zs though I would have no Sabbath to be 
Tvedj IV hie h fev/nth2ty Sabbath (voU 0\vn Enq. p. aft) 
to oe c jtgn for ner between him and his people to Difiin^uijh bts\ 
people from others < which arc yourown words,) that is, (lay I, not 
is your words, hot as m .• own, ) the people of Ifrael from other na-\ 
fiims ; a;id,fo to'be aSignfor Ever, as Circumcifion is an tverkfinrt 
Covenant. 'Bccault ( in the place by yctt there cited, Exod.^i- i"' 



{i 

ah 



Part II. The ChriflU* Sabbath. 95 

it is exprefly faid, // is a fign between me and the Childr en of Ifrael 
^ever. But if by the Children of Ifrael ( as you now tell us ) you 
inot underftand the Children of Ifrael, I cannot help it. I hope 
■will be no ofFenfe to tell you, that I do ; and between them and 
ttbers, to be between Jews and Gentiles , and that, a Sign for ever 1 , 
and a perpetual Covenant, 1 underftand in the fame, fenle as \vfoen 
Circumcifion is called an Eve} lofting Covenant Gen n. 13. And 
/hat is there faid of Circumcifion (ver. it.) // is a token of the Cove- 
fiant between me and you, that is (ver. 9.) thou and thy feed after 
Ihee in their generations, is the fame (as to the feed of Abraham) 
'Hth what is here faid of this feventh-day Sabbath (as to the Chtl 
'rcn of Ifrael) Exod. p. 1 3. // « * Sign between me and you t-brough- 
your generations. And the like ot the TafiWr, EM JW%£ 
Ire 'fnall obfa ve this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy Sons 
w ever ; that is, fo long as this Oeconomy or Admitfiftfaxion 
■nould continue. Now, what was a DtftinElive Mark of the People 
\tf Ifrael from other Nations, (as was Circumcifion, the Jews Wafi- 
fver and feventh-day Sabbath,) was, 1 faid, at an end and^oceafe 
• (that is, to expire, for which words, voti put abelfhed) ivbenCbrift 
had broken down the partition wall between Jew and Gentile, and 
[made both One, and aboiijhed the Enmity (which arc the Apoftles 
words there cited from Ephef. x. 14, it.) but inftead of ^ol'Jhed 
\the Enmity, vou would have it that I make the Sabbath aboltjbed. 
" And at the fame time (while you thus pervert roy words) you 
Complain of Artifice, and Blamable, (as it yours were not fo,) for 
[telling vou that, by the CMdren of Ifrael (whatever you mean) I 
mean tie Children of Ifrael, that is, the Jews. Between whom, and 
! the Gentiles, this was a D'fiinHive Mark^: and therefore then to 
pepke when the Z>iflinffion was to oeale. 
J» As to what you there add (Rep. p. j-x) He repeats, that the Sab- 
\jbatb is a Si^n/yet dou\ts it was either not cbferved at aU, ot long be- 
^ fere this time had been forgotten : I do not underftand the Wit of 
" this Repartee, (unlefs it ly in perverting my words ;) Might not 
tbe feventbdayincwtfe from the firfl raining of <JManna, be a difiin- 
dive Sign for the future, though the feventh day in ccurje pom the 
firfl Creation were either not obferved at all, or long fincefot got ten f 
Like which is that Rep. p. x If I do not how which is the fi>ft or 
Jeventh day in courfe from 'the Creation, why pxuld I write a Book 
for the Observation of* day which is impoffible to be Known ! Indeed 
W I bad writ a Book for the obfemtion of the firft day in courfe 
from the Creation (as you do for the feventh-day in courle from 
tbence) it had been fotnething : but may not we know which is 

the 



9 6 T4e CbriftiM Sdktk Part ft 

thefirji day of Our weeh, without knowing which is fo in a cont'u 
nualcirculatimoflVeeks from the Creation t This, I luppofe von 
take to be Wit (elfe we fhould not have it fo often) and I will 
allow it fo to be; (it is %*igmM$ t a pie turn of words to make 
them look as if there were fomewhat of Argument in them when 
there is none ; fuch as the Logicians call Fallacies;) Surely you 
cannot think there is any fir en^th of Reafon, in fuch arguings. 
And again to mention no more (though you oft talk at this rate) 
Rep. p. 39, /// cannot tell which is the firji or feventh day of titc 
Week (lrom thefirft Creation) this (you fay) overturns all my hook, 
No j not my book, but yours : becaufe you reckon from thence, I do 
not. I am contented with what is thefirji day of our week Or if we 
cannot tell otherwife than by tradition (which claufe you think fit 
conftamly to leave out) which is ioftom Chrijfs time ■ This tradi. 
tion ferves me well enough as to this point, (becaufe we have no 
other way to know it ; nor have you.) , Yet I muft not call this 
Trifling, (That, you fay, 15 a hard word) I wifti the Reader do 
not think it Trifling to take notice of thefe mtticifms. I lhal] 
therefore let them pafs. 

But whenlfay, I am in this print content with Tradition (ha- 
ving no other way to know this matter of fad) pray do not fug- 
gelfc the next time, as if m every thing I content my felf with ut 
certain dark/peculations, and fome, uncertain Romifh Traditions, Rep. 
p. 16. 61 Asp. s9, 6o- becaufe I am content, to take the names of 
the weekdays as I find them, I am reprefented as taking all as I 
find it, and taking all down without chewing. 

Confonant to this doflrine (of permitting to the Jews, of what 
was not to be impofed on the Genaks) is that of St. Taul to the 
Uinitiaa Romans ; (Rom. i± ) many of whom, and perhaps the 
grcateft part of them,feem to have been convertcdjcws(who thought 
themfelvcs yet obliged to the Mofak^Law) others of them Con- 
verted Gentiles (who thought themfelves under no fuch obliga- 
tion :) Particularly m two things, difference of Meats, and diffe- 
rence of Days ; (and it feems to be the fame perfons who were Scru- 
pulous as to both 0 The Jew (who was not yet fatisfied as to his 
Ctmltian hberty,) made Confcicnce of Eating what by the Mofaick 
Law was ■.Unclean; the Gentile not fo, to whom that had not been 
a Law vOneieheveib that he may cat aU things; ami her, who is weak, 
*cateth herbs ; Twas a weakpefs even in the Jew, yet was permit- 
Jed, though not to be impofed Let not him that eateth, defpife him 
tnat eateth not; and let mt him that eatethmt, judge him that eat. 

eth. 



'art It Tht Ckrijlim Sabbath. g 7 

■/A. And fo of Days; One man efteemeth one day above another, 
[which I think to be meant of the Jcwif) S^<*M, though I fuppofc 
you do not,) another efteemeth every day alike. And the reafon why 
[ think it to be meant of the Jewiih Sabbath, is becaufe (as I have 
hewed before, Z)ijc. p. jj, s6,Sl, from Dent. 16. $, 6, 11, iy, 16.) 
pe other Feafls or Feflivals (as that of the Pah over, of Pentecoft, 
ad of Booths,) were not to be obferved out of the holy land, but at 
he Temple onely, and therefore of thefe there could be no doubt at 
Home, becaufe there was no occafion for them ; but, of the Jewifo 
Sabbath there was, even out of their land ; and fo, for the diffe- 
rence of Clean and Unclean meats. And therefore I take thofe days 
and thofe meats, to be the point in cjueftion. And what fays St. Taul 
of thefe days } He that regards a day, regardeth it to the Lord; and 
be that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it : Do 
you think this to be meant of worJJjiping the Sun upon Sunday t { as 
bu would infinuate ity.p.43.4^ //// he meant of a weekly re/t,you 
Vfjit is direBedtbere,not to reft uponSunday^hich was obferved by the 
feathens in honour of the St^n. ) Do you think that they who wor- 
ked the Sun upon Sunday y did regard the day to the Lord I I think 
lot ; nor was the like permifjion to be allowed to fuch, as here the 
ipoftle doth allow. He doth elfe where forbid the eating of things 
?w to Idols ; do you think he would allow them to worfhip the 
m upon Sunday ; and not to be cenfured for fo doing ? It muft be 
jerefbre meant of fuch Obfervance as wa* allowable, and of fuch 
Jay for which there might be fome pretenfe even to Chrijlians (t£ 
hws) and. fuch as was to be obferved out of their own land, and not 
Snfined to Jerufalem or the holy land. Which therefore I take 
be meant of the Jewiih Sabbath ; which might be Obferved, 
$ VLty Impofed. 

(Which alio anfwers All your Allegations, which you often inG/l 
j of Paul's going into the Temple, and the Synagogue, on the 
\batb-day. For he might fo as well on that, as on any other 
)g ; and he did fo on other days and in other places, where he had , 
^opportunity of a concourfe of People; as I (hewed you fully, 
K- p- $°} $*>$h H- t ' iat I n eed not again repeat it. And 'tis 
\ytry httjte you have faid againft it, Rep. p. 41, 42. that I think 
needs no further Anfwer. 

ttluch to the fame purpofe is his doflrine to the Galatians ; fave 
feat here he feems much warmer. He calls it preaching another Gofi 
% and perverting the Gofpel of Chriji, and doth anathematize, or 
Sjnqunce them accurjed who fhall fo do, Gal 1, 6,^ M- and 

H . villi- 



9 $ The Chrifiun SMsth Part 11 

wiiheth thofe v\vo trouble them, Chap.j.ii. by endeavou- 

ring to bring the Gentiles, under the Mofakk. Law* He was con- 
tented to indulge the Jews as to their own praclice, ( which was 
the cafe of the Jews at gome \ ) but when they would not be con- 
tented therewith, but would bang it as x/oke upon the Gentiles^ 
alfo, he will by no means admit it. For though the Bleffxng oj A 
haham were to come upon the Gentiles, Chap* 3. r^. yet not the Srgn 
or m.vk ofViftin^hn; there being now no difference between the 
Circum:iJion and the Uncircum:ijbn x the 7ew and the Greek; which 
he t4pt£t$' three times in this (tort Epiftle to the Galatians y Chap. 
3. 18. Chap. j-. 6. Ch,6. i$> And that this is the main bufinefso! 
this -Epiftle (toatrhthem againft thofe who would bring-in O'r-J 
tumctjion and the m Mofakk Law ) is fo obvious that none who reads 
the Epiftle, with attention, can doubt of it. Nor can it be though! 
that it was the Gentiles intereft thus to introduce the Law, but the 
Jem and Jttdaizwg Chriftians ; who , would c&nfirain them to h 
circumcifed, that they might glory in their fie fh, Chap. tf. ia./i}. 
Where though Circumcifionht mentioned as the chief Badge ; yet 
this was to make them debtors tq the'whole- &aw, and obnoxious to 
it, Chap.$. 5. And amongft thofe beggarly elements, whereunto 
they defirt to be in bondage, this is reckoned as one great mftance, 
ye obferve days and months and times and years ; for which he fay£ 
lam afraid of you left I have be/lowed upon you labour in vam y Chap<| 
4. 9, 10. 1 1. In that to the Romans he fpeaks but of a day, which 
was there in qneftion, (which I take to be ihtjewijb Sa&bath, as 
coritradiftinfl from the Lords-day ; ) hete he puts in days and w 
and months md years ; mt as if ( in Gaktia) there were occalicto 
tor thofe other times (out of the holy land ;')".but becaufe there was 
the feme reafon of all the Mofaiclc times ; And if this -day (of 
which then the doubt might be j were thus to be brought upbn the 
Gentiles, they might by ; fferfairie reafon bring upon them all the 
reft ; for f tejiify faith he d every man who is circumcifed (and 
thereby put under part of that Law ) that he is debtour to the whole 
Law; and he that fubje&s himfelf to one of thofe days, is equally 
obnoxious to ail thofe days and weeks and months and years* . And 
if this (of the feveuth day from the firft raining of Manna in cort-; 
tradiftin&ion to the Lords-day ) were one of thole, this (though not 
particularly named ) comes under that general 

What you object to this ( befide that the Jewrfb Sabbath is not 
particularly named ) is, that thefe beggarly Rudiments or Elements 
of the florid, is to be underrtood of the Heathen* World, and of the 
Heathenifh Injiruftkns, while they were Children, and particularly 

. H of 



^ n \l The QhrifiUn SMatk 99 

I Sunday, which you tell us fo often ( though I do 
Las bv the Heathens obferved in honour of the Sun; And that to 
W itfeemsMoft likely, andfearceto be doubted, that 
tkmedby?aul, and the principal ont, mas Sunday, which the Hea- 
thens obferved, who knew not God ' &c. Rep. p. ^^i^SSS 
took a/ain, and Voti will find thefe Elements of the florid, were not 
reathenijl Elements, but Jewtfh Elements, under which they had 
been fubieft, but now were free; as now no longer under a School- 
ma/ier, as before they had been, Gal j. 14,25% «* c .^ w ;jjj 
a Child differs 'nothing from a Servant, though he ™> 
J*/ is under Tutors and Governors till the time appointed by his ft. 
ther • Even fo we, when we were children, were under the blemenrs 
v f the Worn; but when the fulhefs of time was come (the time ap. 
; pointed by the Father ) Godfent his Son - to redeem 
■under the Law,tbat we might receive the ^ tm f^ A d x ^l 
Sons now at age, and not, as mour Non-age r little differing irom 

Servants ) C&>. 4. a, 3, i P Do 3 r ° u lbink StSW ' when i M 
^^^^Mfi Element, f wo fping t sSunumt 
\ Sunday t I thought Taut had been 4 the feed of Jbraham, of the 
Trite lfBejamin,an Hebrew of the Hebrews { and I thefe, you there 
Ell us, were not of thofe who knew not God, but did/vyce to thoje 
Tho b nature are not Gods*) that hehad beer ^W*' f f'/^JJ 
tof Gamaliel^ according to thejh'iffeji way of their Religion he lived 
K PllifeeAnd was, as % the law blamelefs. 'Twas .not therefore 
Heathenifh Elements and Heathenifh days ; but ElementsM 
Jewifh days ; and if this from thefof raining of Manna ( as contra- 
difhngmied from the Lords^day) were Rich ; this conies withm 
rtiatifumber. He fays indeed ver.9. rMGalatians)^^*^ 
God, didfervice to them which by nature were not Gods ; But is tftere 
no difference between Te andV? ? W We (faith Pan ) 
J^JLto tie Elements of the World; But Jw ft (notW^) 
who ^ww &c. 

A third place which I alleged to this pu.rpofe ( and which is com- 
I' 1 monly alleged ) is Co/- x. 16. Lr/ w **** Mf|M« rt- 
0 r in refpea of an holy-day ( or feilival ) * ?/ the Almoin n 
of the Sabbath-days ; M are tfiadvu of things to come. Here Sab- 
\ *U\s exprcfly named ( which takes off your exception that m the 
' other place, it is not) and in contradictor! tto other Fejtnals 
and New-moons. And this you acknowledge [ Ret. p. 44. ) feem t 
he at leaft a cthurable objeQion, [ the mf colourable oljeBm that you 
knorn. ) Let us fee howyou canavoid it, . ^ 



Digitized j>V the Center.) 



tentist R 



ICO 



The Cbrijii/n Sabfatk Part II. 

The Saints and faithful brethren in Chrijl which are at Colojj'e; 
feem (you fay) to be converted Heathens, and I fuppofe many of 
them were fo, but there were it feems, amongft them, fome Judai. 
zing Chriflians. And Paul warns them ( you lay ) to beware leil any 
manfpoil them through Philofophy and vain Deceit; which you take 
to be Platonuk Heathen Philofophy ; but I take it rather to be the 
Jewi/b Philofophy, or the doctrine of the Jews; becaufe of the 
words that next follow, after the tradition of men, after the rudi. 
ments of the fTorld, and not after Chrijl. Which I take to be a con- 
tradiftin£hon of the Jewifb doctrine, to the Chrijlian do<2rine ; and 
I fo think becaufe all the particulars there mentioned {meats 
drinks, FcB'tvals, New-moons, Sabbaths, ver. id ) were Jewi/b Tra- 
ditions: And fuch are thofc rudiments of the world, ver. 20, 11. 
Touch not, toft not, handle not. And at ver. 11. the C'trcumifim of 
Chrijl made without hands, is put in oppofition to the Jewifh 
cumcifion (which was no part of Heathenifli Worfhip) in room of 
whichwc havei?^, ver. 12.' and all this in purfuance of 
Cbrijls blotting out the hand-writing of lOrdmances ver. if. and 
nailing it to his Crofi ; meaning the Mofaick Ceremonial Law; 
Chrilt being the Body of which thofe were but the Jbadows, v. 17. 
In all whkh I fee no, mention of the Thilofophical Heathenifh world. ' 
but of the* Jewifh onely. And though the Heathens had alfo fome 
Feftivals, I do not remember that I have any where found that 
their Feftivals were wont to be called Sabbaths. You take, the Ru- 
diments and Elements of the tVorld, to be the rudiments or firfl 
tubing of the Heathenijh World; but 'tis plain to be meant of the 
Jewi/b ffforld ( as I fhewed you but now from Gal. 4. 3. ) thofe Ru- 
dinfents or Elements under which Paul was, before the fullnefs of 
time was come ; which were ( not the Heathenifli, but ) jewifh E- 
iements. And that you may not think it ftrange that the Jewilb 
doffrine mould be called the Jewifh Philofophy ; you may confider 
that the name of Philofophy was wont to be applied tothefeveral 
forts of doctrines Or ways of teaching or wifdom of feveral*fe&» 
or nations wherein they differed from one another, (as the Philo- 
fophy of leno, Plato, Ariftotle, the Greeks, the Romans, andfo the 
Jews or Hebrews. ) And thus Clemens Alexandrmus in his Stroto- 
mata diftinguifheth the Philofophy of the Greeks, from the 
t«» the Philojophy of the Barbarians, meaning that 

; ot the Jews from whole Philofopby he fhews the Greeks had bor- - 
r rowed much of their Learning. As before I fhewed you 2)ifc. p. S S 
So that to me it feems clear to be meant, not of any Heathen Pbilo- 
fopby, but the Philofophy, Wifdom,. or Learning of the Jews, the 

Jewijb 



Part II. The ChriflUn Sabbath. I01 

Jewi/b Doffrine as contradiftinguifhed to that of Chrift. 

You tell us Rep. p. 48. that; be fide the feventh-day Sabbath the 
Jtws had at leaft three Fejlivals or Sabbaths ; The feafi At the Pafs- 
'tver, Lev. 23. 4, The feafl of Pentecojl, fifty days after the Pafs- 
tver, ver. i S , 16. (But that's a miftake, not Ji/ty days after the Pat s- 
™\>™ fify days rfter the Wave-offering,) which two are indeed 
called Ftjtrva/s, ( in the place by you cited ) but not Sabbaths } And 
thelabbath of years, Lev. is. 4,9, 10. But all thefe (whether Sab- 
baths or not Sabbaths) are confined to the Holy land, Deut. 16. 
S,6 t 11, is, 16. Lev. 1?. 1. wherein the Coloffians were not coni 
cerned (for ColoJJe was far enough off from the Holy land) and 
therefore not likely that any of thefe are the SabUth here meant 
but fome other Sabbath, to which they might pretend at Coloffe • 
And what could that be but the Jews feventh-day Sabbath ? 

Your former Exception ( becaufe of mCeirof here ufedin the plu- 
ral number) that oitu-n. in the plural number doth never fignify the 
Sahbath-day, but onely dCS tm in the Angular ; you now find to be a 
miftake, and own that aiCU-n in the plural number is fometimes 
nfed for ne Sabbath-day. But I am to inform you further that odCCa!)* 
in the plural number, is not once or twice, but raoft frequently lb 
ufed by the Septuagwts (in their Greek Tranflationof the Old le- 
bmcnt, cfpecially of the five iBooks of Mpfes) whole Language the 
New Teflament doth ufc to follow. You know that in divers Lan- 
[uages there be>any words which as to the form be T/ura/s } but in 
ignification Singulars. Thus Nupti<c y though in the plural num. 
bcr, figmfies but One Marriage, and Nundirue One Fair, and jttht- 
fcf One Athens ; fo Calenda is but one day {pies Calendarum,) and 
hon<t is dies mnarum, and ldus is dies i/uutn : And tertio Calendas 
cu Calenda* urn, is tertio die ante C alendasfeu diem Catendarum. And 
uch is ™M*.t« for One Sabbath-d^y, dies Sabbatorum. So in the 
ourth Commandment Exod. 10. 8. ^taw ftw »>W* <*>M'i*r> 
lemember the Sabbath-day ( diem Sabbatorum ) to heep it holy. And 
nr. Jo. iriw 79 igiiw aiBfaU the /event/? day is the Sabbath 
fcbbatha) of the Lord thy God. And Deut. ia. ifap 
Mm, keep the Sabbath day (diem Sabbatorum) to fanttify it; and 
r. 14. Tit A v«o a 7* iCJoftti oit/U-m auto but the I event l A day is 
fabbata ) the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. Exod 1 6 ij. aj^ m 
Y* v "' V * y f>'<r* «Jci«r, to morrow is thefabbath ( Sabbatha ) a 

r / [° , the Lord > and ver ' l6 ' 7 * J T " ™M*t*, on 
feventb day is the fabbath ( Sabbata. ) Exod, 31. 13. ^ ai$fi*ii ^ 

ti&aiy ^««f S?7, my Sabbath (Sabbata) it is a fign between me 

and 



19* 



The dittyhn SMath. 



Part II. 



flr VZl m the nlural aerees with n( «*f and *S* m the fin- 
ffiffiilS ) b/caufe, thocgh m^e plural 

den cfmd lball keep the Sabbath ( *1 aJjfciW ) If « fcW «• 
y EV w Where, in five verfes together Sabbaa in the 

& P Ut^ 

^tf^V&t**** SMtfs or rejts) EM 

I!, 1? t a ( and in how many more places I do not at pre-, 
kit if e mbe , 4 ) tffiS manifest that ?* 4, jP * 

«^ L «Vday. And if thefe be not enough I can eaUy fcj 
nTlh von with more For in all the five Books ol Moles we lhafl 
MVW «lCf« in the lingular number, but 4*t. » 
the nlural I (hall not deny but that it may be found m fom 
S Books of the OldTeftW (.for 1 ^ take them toU 
all tranflated by the fame hand, or in the fame ftilc ) But as 

her is wont, to be ufed as a Proper name for one Sabbath-day. ft 
WZWMH is fometimes ufed and in A^W 

^ty often in the lingular number ; but very ^»»?*H 

hit^K 



£abbaw-d&¥* alio in i^cw \ L \i r ffl / f ,mi 

lows theianguage of the Scptuagmts ) 
-called c««* it is. very often and . *g * -ffi^ 

.and fo I take it to be here ineant Col. 1 U B «CC«r* 



feartll. The CkriftiM SMrth. »J? 

Sa^*r/j ( whether or ^.r be fupplied, I think is much one ; 
for the Original hath neither ; } Let no matt judge you in meat cr in 
-drink, « i» iopft ft » «r » of <i 

or New-moon cr Sabbath ; that is, I take it, •«< V«f«« ^ 
'firm, as we find it commonly worded, not W «>f*r W e*CMitf, 
which I think is no where found in Scripture. 

And (as here) fo in divers other places FfaW, New-moon and 
&Mitfi6 we find mentioned as in the fame equipage, 2 Kin. 4. 23. 
Wherefore wilt thou go to him today' it is neither New-moon nor 
Sabbath 1 Chr. 13.31. In the Sabbath, on the New-mbon and m 
the jet Feajis. 2 Chr. 2. 4. /or />6f burnt-ogevings, oh the Sabbaths, 
and on the fflw-tnooBj, and on tbe folemn Feajis. 1 Chr. 31 . 3, /?ar»/- 
fir /if &M«^ «W for the New-moons and Jor the Jet 
feafts. Nehem. 10. 37. BurnUferings of the Sabbaths, and of the 
■New-moons, for the fit Feafi. tfai. 1. i 3> H- ^ New-moons' and 
Sabbath I caiinot away with, pur New-moons and your Womted 
mjsfmfouihaleth. Ezek.4y.1-7. mhe Feafts and m the New- 
\ nJns and in the Sabbaths. Ezck. +6. 3. In the Sabbaths and m the 
New-movns. Lain.!. 6. The Lord hath caufed the Jolemn heap ; u,> 
, Sabbaths to be forgotten. Ezek. 46. 1. IiJhaUbe fbatjhtfjrwor^ 
days, bur id the Sabbath it fiia/l be opened, and in the day of the- New- 
mm it (hall be opened. Hof * 1 1. fwillcaufe att her mirth to ceaje, 
'6er' F(aff-days, M -New-moons, and her Sabbaths. Amos g. J", trbtn 
itiS the New moon be gone 'that we may jell corn, and toe Sabbath 
that'we mat fet fhih wheat ? Mow if in all thefe places-, where 
Sabbaths are coupled with Ntw moom arid Feajis, it be meant of the 
fyw'sSaenth.day Sabbath,why Ihould it not be thought to be fo meant 
htrt-Colx.r6.of tlx Feq/l,tr of the New-mom,or of the Sabbath r I add 
: W mie plact more, which£ir*. p.2-. you thuscite, ; (tfrr^m»|/o 
Gofpd-tMes,\lt jbaU come topaji that from one Sabbath to another JIm/J 
ali pfh vome fo worfitp bejihe me, faith Jehovah, IJau 66. 2-3,24. And, 
voih this^m fay, that 'great GofpeWropbet concludes his 9ropheJy: 
which ^mi (hotild have cited thus, From one New-mom to another, 
and fi-ofti one Sabbath to another M- which therefore fayes no more 
of the Sabbath than of the New-moon. And why thofc words * 
FrtB or f^miotr^Sabbath' Ihould not he thought to lignily 
the fame in M iM- as the fame words^^'A^f^J*** m- 
Utfr, do fignify in E«&& H tCh>.*-iV- i Chr. 2 4 ^ 
'it 3. 2S*Ai&$- Hof. 2. m ( and the other places cited) Hee 
no rtafon.- And if the words Fwff and New-moon fignify the lame 
here as there ; why fhould not alio Sabbath be thought here to 
fignify -arthete it doth ?' ' All wfcch is^fel* in derogation of 



'Digitized by the Center f< 



r entist Research 



i|4 Tk Chrifiim Sahbatk Part II. 

the fFeekfy Sabbath indefinitely, but of thatjfcwr Weekly Sabbath, 
in Contradiftin&ion to the Lords day. Wliich I am fain to men- 
tion fo often ( in defenfe of my felf and others ) becaufe where 
you find any to mention that the Weekly Sabbath or Seventh-day 
Sabbath ( meaning that oi the Fourth Commandment ) is not here 
abolifhed ; you prefently catch at it as if they fpoke it of this 
Seventh-day Sabbath ; ( that of the Jews from the firft raining 
of Manna ; ) whereas you know, that even thofe wjio thus fptak, 
do conftantly maintain, that the Jews Seventh-day Sabbath was 
exchanged fox the Lords-day r which is a Weekly Sabbath as well 
as that of the Jews. 

You have yet another Exception, whereby you hope to elude 
this place ■ ( leaving no Hone unturned, to baffle it it you can ;) 
Repi p. 4^,47,48. that ouKJtw in the plural number is in the 
New Tejlament fame time underftood of the Sabbath, and fometime 
of the Week \ and to you it feems it ought rather to be here ren- 
dered Weeks. 'Tis well you laid ^CCirar (not for you 
had no pretence, as to any other Cafe but the Genitive. But I 
*k> not find that either here, or any where elfe, either in the Jin- 
gular or the plural number, either in the Genitive or any other 
Caje y it fignifies week ox weeks. The onely pretenfe ( that I know 
of ) why you fo thinly is, becaufe mtfiirmj is commonly ren- 
dered the first day of the week \ as if you thought fu* to fignify 
firft and mrM*7*f week. ( And fome others, not well attending 
the Greek conftnidtion, are apt fo to take it. ) Bat it is a miftake 
( as I told you the iaft time, and have here again told you more 
-than once. ) For this is not a literal translation ( word for word) 
.but onely as to the fenfe (phrafe for phrafe) ftich as when pi 
yliot^l Rom. j. 4, 6. Rom. 8. 2, 1 5, and elfe where ) is tranflated God 
firbid; not as : if ^ fignified God 7 and forbid ; but becaufe 
an Greek ^ }irw7a v ( it mt ) a^fwers to our EngHQi phrafc God 
forbid,; for whsft.^^Keject with fome Abhorrence. So 2 Joh. 10, 
1 1. y* K*ym y Bid him not God fpeed. Thus $1 ax€Ch*f { that 
is &a ttA e <f W-ob9£^t«;v ) one day after the Sabbath^ anfwers to our 
EngUlh phrafc the firft day ofjhe week. And fo Luh 18.12,. vnstio 
JU tr^itb (that is &d from the Sabbath ( or after 
eaclvSabbathi ) 1 fa ft twice \ hefore the next Sabbath ) which is 
tfee fame in fesie with our Kugliflji phrafc , / foft twicf in the 
week. - Not as if it were rendered word- for word, bin fenfe for 
fenfe 4 4>therwife, if era'ce*™* bad fignified <week 7 it fhould have 
hcen 1^ (WeaV? (that is, JU h i*f mSC&rv) not JU <ra 
aaJiae it is. 'Tis your miltake therefore to think rfiat either 



'part II. tkt Chripan Sabbath. f PS 

wtefa™ or *itt*m doth of it felf fignify week or weeks > here or any 
where elfe. And this I told you the faft time, though you do nor 
think fit to take notice of it,or regard it ; nor do you now bnngany 

"thing to take off that Anftrer. And, befide theft Two Inftancc: 
(which, are clearly folved by theEllipfis of the Prepohtion *m) 
I do not know a Third, where either Wgar* or w^tm is fufpeftec 
to fignify Week ; and, no wh^re. Weeks. And if ijx 
plural number always fignify either Weeks or Sabbaths; ltwtL 

■ make a&ainft, not for you j As at Mat. iS. t. U* *? ^ T f" 

\^ !t ^Wl*"* at the end of the fabbath, when the next day 
after thefabkathvoas drawing on } [o I under/land it: but it (becauic us 
the plural number; which } you fay, doth ordinarily fignify more than one) 

1 you will W% % ™ hen ™ ere at an en *l °\ when Szbbathy 

were atari end; your work is -at an end : For if there mud be 
. no more Weeks, or no more Sabbatbs> what will becotpe of your 

I v Seventh-day Sabbath ? But if you would have n&henthe Seventh day 
" Sabbaths were at ah end, and the Brfl-day Sabbath coming on ; this 
makes for the Z>$#<?r, not qgainft the Potior y . as you would have n 

I Repl t p.47. I add "further, it the Sabbaths Col. i.id. do mean the Fin i 

; day i.e. Sunday, (as you thcreTuggeft,) why do you tell us [Ettftt. 

1 a 28;} that, in the Old and NewTeJlavtentj the Ftrft day 1* never 
'called Sabbath* And in levit 23. u, 14. both the day of the w- 
and the day of^entecojl (which, Rep, p, 46. you would haye 
'tohea^i^, though! tdo not find 'it' the re fo called) were both 
j of them to be on the the morrow after the Sahbath, which 1 take w 
be the firft day of the week'. 

And yet further; If rhefe Ceremonial Sabbaths of the yews, ( for 
■ you do not pretend toftew that the Hedthemfh days were ever call- 
. cd Sabbaths) be the Sabbath (day or days) here intended ; the word 
a*$£JrM might have been. left out, and the word' tym would as 

' " well have ferved without it. For ( whether Sabbaths or no ) they 
are all Fejlivals Skt*?, and fo caflcd {Fenfis of the Lord) Levit. 23, z } 

4,6, u, is^ Zij4rftig^#3 And thcfe f e 

in contradiftinaion to the Sabbath , 4^ $ ««^w,> befide tte 

Ubc Sabbath of the Lord, ver. 3 -7, j 8. For though the Sahath alio 
he a Feaft y ver, i> 3. yet it is fomewhat more than thofe other 
Fcafts, and therefore (in the place before u%fCol 2. 16. ) /us men- 

Luoned ty name^ as diftina from the reft, Let no man m dge you m 
regard (Lffi S i VM rU S «f&fr*0 of a Fejltval, or Newmoo^orSa^ m 
' bath. Whereof the Fefthml returned once a Tear f the I&w-mm y 

k > once a Month : the Sabbath once a Week. Which therefore I takfe 

\\ to be the Jewifh Sabbath as contradiftingnilhisd to Uie Lorfs day\ 

0 For 



Sventis t Rese arch 



ic6 The Chrifiun S&bbath. Part II. 

For 'tis of the j/wifh InlHtutions, (not the Chrijtian fnjlitutions} 
that he is here fptaking : not of the Lords day, nor ot tht Lords 
Supper ; though thefe be Chti/lian Feajis, as were the Jcvoifbr Sab- 
baih and Tajuver Feafh of the Jeutf. Which Chriftim Feflivals } 
exclude thole of the Jews, as Baptifm excludes Circtmcijiw^ vcr. 
,H, i 2. Yet not fo but that they were then Permitted to the Jews 
(though not obliging) but not to be Impofed upon the Gentiles. 

Befide thefe places alleged, wherein is mention of Bays, Fea/ls, 
Sabbaths, &c. The fame exemption f rom thefe I take to be imply- 
cd in all thofe other places, which lay Jews and Gentiles in com- 
mon. Is he the God of the Jews onely } is he not alfo of the Gen- 
hies i Tes, of the Gentiles alfo, Rom. 3. 29. There- is no difference 
let ween the Jew and the GreeJ^: For the fame Lord over aU 9 is rich 
unto ail that call upon him, Rom. 10. n. Are we better than they t 
Nojn no wife, Rom. 3. p. Cometh this biefJednffiapn^fa Ch'CUm 
onely ! or upon theVncircumcifion alfo ) Tes, upon them alfo ; ver. 29. 
Fur Faith was reckoned to Abrabmfvr fighn 'dUfotjS ; Mot when he 
was in Circumcijion, but in (Jncircumcijidn ; that he might be the fa- 
ther of all that believe, though they be not circumcifed y Rom. 4. 9, 10, 
j i. Ctr.umcijion is nothing, 'and^Uncitcumcifion is nothings 1 Car. % 
19. So Gal j. 18. Gal y. 6. Gal 6. ij. and to the fame pnrpofe cJfe: 
where. In which places, and others to the like purpofe, though 
Circumcifion be mentioned as the diftffi&We Chara&er, yet it is in- 
tended as a comprehenfive Word of the whole <jMifaici_Laiv fo 
iar as it was peculiar to the Jews, as appears AH. \$. \. Except ye 
bt circumafed after the manner of ^fofes ; And ver. $. needful to 
circumcife them y and command them to keep the law ofMofes. And 
ver. mujl be circumcifed and' keep tie Lazv. And Cat. y. 3. he 
that Is circumafed is a debtor to do we whole law : And Chap 6. 1 3. the 
Apoftle complains of it, as incongruous, to prefs Ci r Came rj 'ion , with- 
out an obligation to the whole Law ; ( for neither they who are 
circumcifed keep the Law ;) intimating a like obligation to both, and 
a like exemption from both. And therefore cohorts them to/fitf^ 
fty in the liberty wherewith Chrijl hath made them frte, w/(aftcr 
Uich frtedomc ) not to be again int angled with the yoke of 1 bondage, 
Chap.j. 1. And, in like manner, thole ttjerufakm, Aff. if. ( lince^ 
that God\ (ay they, bath put no difference bctwcen*us and them ) con- 
clude not to put a yoke on tbeneckjoftbe difcip/es } but onely thofe 
ueceffary things (of which the Jewifh Sabbath is none,) ver. 9, 10, 
19,20,28,19. And again A3, it. zo, zu 24, ay. So that what 
was before peculiar to the Jews is declared to be not obliging to 



Digitized bv the Cei 



.Part IT. The Chriftan Sabbath. *°7 

the Gentiles : of which number I take this to be one, of deternri- 

. nine their Sabbath, to the Seventh day front the firft raining of Man. 

\na And,confequemly,we are not obliged (together with the Lwds- 
day) to obferve the Jewifo Sabbaths 

I have now difpatch'd ( and I think fufficiently } both parts < 1 
, what I undertook : To Jultify our obfervation of the Loros Day , 
And that we are not obliged to thejewilh Sabbath. I fliall nowen- 
1 deavourtofatisfyyoujititmaybe) M what vou moft infill upon, 
\ for the continuance of the Jcwilh Sabbath, whether with or with 

out the Lords day. ; . /• .u l 

What vou endeavour to maintain, is this; That pom the begin- 
nm of the W^rU, as anient as the Creation (Rep. p. 8.) before tht 
entrance of Jin and the fall of wan fEnq. p. a?. £• Rep. p. jo. ) om 
Lord Jefus Chrijl, our Mediator and Redeemer (Enq. p. i 13, 64, J, 
~ at 86 ix6, in ) did obferve, inftttute, hle/s and fanRifytbe 
feventbday\k^- i%M and that this dotb include the J event b 
dav of every wek.after*ards in a continual fucceffon or circulation 0} 
day and weeks (Enq.p.a 7 ,*o, gy . Rep.p 6,7.) f d ^ t ^f t f da J. 
(Enq p.x?.) then orfince confecrated or obferved as boly, but the f event b 
lonely} Rep. p. 1, 8. ) and not onely Afeventb day, but The feventb 
diy (in a continued courjefrom the fir si creation, and norther day of 
ticwek, (Enq.o. h 46,ns.)foUn f as the IVmU lafls (Enq. p. 
za Sep. p. u 1. ) to Gentiles, as vieU as Jews ( Enq p. aj, 24, aj". ) 
^ this I llginalways at Smfet .( Enq. ^ 8j. Rep. p. 68. ) And 
that this was thenceforth observed continually, { Enq. p. a;, H, ia. ) 
even to this day (Enq. p. i9-ll ) *** '^e memory thereof, ^ that we 
mav not be at a lofs to know which is the day, tranfmitted continu- 
ally from Father to Son ( Rep. p. 10. ) and this tradition never inter- 
rupted or forgotten, ( Enq. p. 39- ) either before or fme our Saviours 
time, Enq. p. 19, ~8, 93. Rep. p. a, 3,^3. , 

But certainly there is much of this that we have no Word lor , 
no Exprefs Command recorded. 'Tis but your conjures or obfeure 
inferences which you build upon ; while nothing will ferve you in 
our cafe, but an exprefs command recorded in the wrd. Enq.4). 4, 
■32 41,44,48,70. As I have already (hewed in molt of the par- 
ticulars. And fhall again inftance in fome of thera. 

When you tell us, the Seventh-day- fahhath is as ancient as the 
creation, (Rep. p. 8.) I fuppofe you will abate the firjl Six days, for 
there is no pretenfeof a Sabbath before the Snentb. And I fuppofe 
vou will allow a precedence to the Inftitution of Marriage ; lor 
though in order of the Story, the creation ot Eve, and giving her 



l0 & The ChriftU* Sabbath. Part It 

in marriage to Adam, Gen. 2. be roe ntioned after that of Cods reft 9 
ing on the feventh day, yet in order of Time it was before it : For 
tis fure that on the Sixth day, God had created Man, male and ft- 
mare, aftejr his own image, Gen. t 27. andBlefled them, faying, 
Be fruitful and multiply, ver. 18. And the like of their Eating the 
forbidden fruit, Gen 3. though mentioned afterward, might be be- 
tore, for ought we know. And therefore when you tell us (En*, p. 

rh ~c 1 and Re P % P' s 0 that il was be f or€ the cntrance °f Sin and the 
fauof Adam; 'tis more than you or I know, (there is no fVord for 
it, nor is it Jb Written;) And ( if that were material to our bufinefs) 
\t may be literally true, Man being in honour continued not, or as the 
words are m the Original (ffal. 4.9. 12. ) Adamm honour, (lodged 
not, or) continued not anight; but became like thebeajl that p€rifh,{oi 
became mortal:) And 'tis likely enough that they might Sin the 
Sixth day ( on uhich they were created ; ) For elfe ( Adam and Eve 
being created, not as in an eftate of childhood, but as at full-age ■ 
and, having received the Bleliing of Increafe and multiply) if they 
had fo continued one night, I fee not why Cain (if the firft. born ) 
njightnot have been conceived in innocency (which I hardly think, 
as well brother rcafons, as becaufe it is not till after they Were 
put out of Paradifc,that 'tis faid, Adam kyiew his WifcEvcand Jhe con* 

u Gcn 4 ' And lf they ha<1 ( as y° u fll PP° fe ) celebrated the firft 
Sabbath in Innocency, I lee not why he fhould not then have duly 
eaten of the tree of Life, to live for ever^Qm-'i. £ and Chap. j. ». 
which is thought to have been a Sacrament of their Confirmation 
in Innocencv, and freedome from 'Death ( to which, by eating of the 
other Tree, they became obnoxious, Gen. 2. 17. and Chap. j. u, 
ip. ) But this not being our prefent bufinefs, I fhall not infill: up-' 
on it. , ,i\ ■ a i ■ % . ■ A 

I could tell you alfo'of fome Grave Divines (if that were the way 
ot deputation between you and me to quote Authorities) who 
jead it (Gen. 1. 1.) And on the Seventh day God Terfeffed the 
work which he had made (for fo vajickal fignifies :) u ndcrf landing it 
of Gods proroife-of Chrift on that day (before which promife, the 
condition of man after the fall, was very imperfeff as to his hap. 
pinefs,) and by Gods Bleffing that day, they underftand this great 
BleJJmg promifed on that day. Perhaps you may have feen a noted 
Treatife to that purpofe of Mx. Walker, a grave Minifterin London 
above threefcore years ago. And I have by me a ManufcriptTreatife 
to the fame purpofe of Dr. A/ting (Jacobus Altingius)* grave Divine 
and Profeflor at Groningen, .in purfuanee of Mr. Walker's notion, 
which he doth highly approve. But I lift no t to flart new matter 

*0 0 f 



Part IL The Chriftity Sabbath. 109 

f difpute between you and me when there is no need of it. Onelv 
may mind you, how flight a matter you make (Rep p. 11. ) of 
Shrifts foleran^/^Z^his Difciples and their Aflembly (Job. 20. 
k$, 21 . ) a firft and fecond time, on the day of his Refurrechon be- 
ing thefirft day, while here you would (on the Seventh day) make 
pan Inftitution. 

I might tell you alfo that the other word to Sanctify, doth not 
neceflanly fignify to lnjlitute, but to celebrate, or keep holy, 'Tis 
the fame word in the Hebrew, for tJMans San&ifying the Sab- 
lath in the Fourth Commandment, Exod. 20.8. and T)eut.$. 12. 
Remember the Sabbath day to fanftify it ) that is here uied of Cod, 
he JanBifedit.) And the fame word Exod. 20. ol \&fan at ver. 8. 
nd of God, ver. 1 1. he blejfed the Sabbath day and Sanftifyed it. 
But fure tht meaning is not, Remember to InHitute the Sabhath 
y. So Neb. 1 3. 22. to Sanffi/y the Sabbath day. Jcr. 1 7. 22^4, 27. 
And 'twere endlefs to tell you how oft wc are minded to Sutifijfy 
the Sabbath day ; that is, to Celebrate or Keep holy, but not to IrtJU- 
We the Sabbath-day : So Joel %. ij, 16. Sanftify a Fajl, cull a So- 
lemn Afjembh, gather the Teople, &c. that is, Celebrate &c. Though 
n all thefe places it be the fame word in the Original that is here. 
4nd if to Blefi and Celebrate be here an Inftitution ; why fhould it 
Bot be fo when ChriH did JSlefsand Celebrate the day of his Refur- 
teffion, with bit Difciples. Mean while I am loth to extenuate or 
tfiminifh the fenle of the word here, but willing to allow its full 
ibrcc and emphafis : Onely to (hew you how unkind you are to the 
Lords<day ( which, with you, is worfliiping the Sun upon Sunday) 
irhile you are fo very zealous for the Jewifh Sabbath, as thofe Aft. 
Li. 20. zealous of the law. Yet I fhall not call it, woifbiping Saturn 
upon Saturday. 

LvAnd whenyou make fo great a bufinefs, and lb often, with A 
Seventh and The Seventh ; Wc call it The feventh as well as you. 
But the queftion is, The Seventh from whence i In Exod. 16. it is 
The Seventh in courfe from the firft raining of t3Ianna; In the 
ourth Commandment, his The Seventh after fix days of labour : 
The Lords-day is The Seventh in courfe from the day of Chrift s Re- 
hreffion. Tis vain to think that where-ever we meet with The 
feventb-day it muft prefently fignify The feventh in Courfe from 
be firft Creation. On the Seventh day the Child died, 2 Sam. 1 2 18. 
I'this the Seventh from the creation f or from the raining of Man- 
$? or after Six days of Labour f No. But the Seventh day of the 
Jhilds age and fickftefi. So the feventh day, Juilg. 14. ly, 1-, 18. is 
fae Seventh day of Sampfons fe*H: hwifofb. 6. 4, 15-. the Seventh 
liv^I; day 



\ 



Part II. fart IT. 



, , o The Chips* Sabhth. 

day of their tompaffxng the Walls of Jericho. So Lev. 23. 8. m the 
Seventh day is a he// Convocation, ye thai) do no fcrvile work therein. 
Is this the Seventh in courfe trom the Creation? No. But the Se. 
venth day of the Tafchal Feajl, or Fea/l of Unleavened Bread, what, 
ever day of the Week it happen to be. And the like M the fame 
Chapter, Lev^i-it ver. 24, 27, 30, 32, ir, ?6\ 3 9. where ' f^t Se- 
venth dap doth nbt fignify the Seventh incowxk frtm the firft Cre- 
Alton, b&fdtoe other Seventh day. And when Enq. p 16. from Ex. 
24 16 the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud 
cneredit Six days, and the Seventh day he called unto Mofes out of 
the midft of the cloud, You would have this to be on the Seventh day 
SAbbath : "Tis more than You or I know. 'Twas indeed the Seventh 
day after tbof'e Six on which the Cloud covered Mount Sinai, but it 
is not faid it was the Sabbath day, or the Seventh day of the Week, 
much lefs the Seventh in courfe from the firft Creation; all this is 
hut your Conjeffure without Book. Now pray tell me, How I fhall 
know that thefeventh day (Exod. 16". 20. 17, 30.) from thefirjl ram- 
in* of Manna, is the feventh in courfe from the Creation, any more 
th 6 an that the feventh day of the Cbilds age is fo ? or the feventh day 
of Sampfons feajl f or,the feventh day ot eucompaftng Jericho ? You 
will fay perhaps, Becaufe 'tis faid Exod. 26. 13. To morrow (is] the 
reft of the Ho!/ Sabbath; and ver. ij-. today [is] a Sabbath to the 
Lord, zndver. i5. thefeventh day [which is] the Sabbath. But this 
will not ferve the turn ; • for the word [rs] is not in the Original, 
but fnpplied by the Trandators : to morrow the reft ; Today a Sab- 
Uth ; The feventh day, the Sabbath ; that is, is or is to be; for the 0- 
rieinal will indifferently hear either. And ver. 29. See, for the 
ford hath Given you the Sabbath (as ifthere were now newly given) 
therefore he giveth you on thefixth day the bread of two days. Like as 
Levit 1- 3. i» the feventh [is] an holy Convocation,^ Jball do infer- 
Vile work,; [or is to be:] But this is indeed a Sabbath (nofervik 
wirk to be 3bn* in it ) and fo you call it ( Rep.?. 48. ) and though it 
be The feventh day, yet not the feventh in courfe from the firft Cre- 
ation; but the Seventh day of the Tafchal feaft (on whatever day 
of the Week.) Yet in all thefe places it is in the Hebrew Hafhebigm 
( The Seventh ) as well as here. So that Thefeventh, will do you 
no Service : Nor doth it hence appear that the Jewifh Sabbath was 
oil the Seventh in courfe I rom the fijfl Creation. 

However ( you'll fay ) the feventh from the first Creation, was the 
day on which God refted. And no doubt but the feventh from the 
firft Creation was the feventh from the firfi Creation ; The Seventh 
day of the World, was, the Seventh day of the World ; Th« 
J Seventh 



in 



The Chriftia* Sabbath. 

jbventh day of the Tear, was, the Seventh day of the Tear ; The 
leventh day of the Month, was, the Seventh day of the Month ; 
tad The Seventh day of the Week ( if they did then reckon by 
Veeks ) was The Seventh day of the Week > But whether or no 
they did then reckon by Weeks, is the point in queltion. That they 
did then reckon by Days, Months, and Tears, we may learn from 
Gen. 1. 14. (which are plainly diflinguiflied by the Motions of the 
Sun and Moon, ) But no mention of Weeks, there nor any where 
ilfe )(that I can find) earlier than Exod 16. after their coming 
<6ut Egypt. Nor do the Sun and Moon fo djftinguifli Weeks, as 
Ithey do Days, Months and Tears. 

k But fuppofe we, that God did ( as no doubt he did ) Celebrate or 
VStgnalisse ( by fome eminent Act or great Bklling) this Seventhly 
W the Week, of the Mcnth, of the Tear-, of the World} as for 
teftance, by calling Adam" and Eve to account for having Eaten of the 
Forbidden Fruit ; and thereupon.pronouncing a Sentence upon the 
Serpent, the Woman, the Man, and the Earth; and then cloung 
(ti^ith the BlefedTromife of the Seed of the Woman; How doth 
Nit appear from hence that it is to be our Pattern ? and, if a Pattern, 
whether as to the feventh day of the Week, or of the Month, or of 
l the Tear ? 'Tis not faid Man did Blefs, Sanctify, or Celebrate that 
Iday, or that he was commanded fo to do, or did celebrate any Sab- 
ibath before that of Exod. 16. from the firft Raining of Manna. Or 
$Man>i\(i> might be faid (fo far as he was therein concerned) to ft- 
Helrate \ not to inflitute) this one day (as Mofes and Ifrael Exod.i j\ 
-did that of their palling through the Red-Sea, on whatever day that 
Was ; And Noah upon his coming out of the Ark, Gen.8. 20,11. when 
be alfo received a Tromife that God would no more deflroy the World 
WbiTb a -Fhod, when God gave the Rain bow as a token of this Cove- 
hMt .ttith him andmth all Flefh, Chap.o. 9,10, n, 12,1 3, 14,1*, 16, 
H" r And 'Deborah and Barai Judg. s- upon the Deftruftion of St- 
Wera: ) It doth not, from hence, follow that this muft therefore be 
tebferved weekly, to the End of the World. There was indeed in the 
BP*/} over, an Annual memorial ( not weekly ) of the day on which 
Whey came out of ' Egfpt; but not to the World's end. 
I You'll fay perhaps Gods refting is made a Pattern in the Fourth 
Commandment,Tiotofan annual but a weekly Sabbath. Very well. 
But -that doth not appear from hence (Gen. 2. ) but from Exod. 20. 
after Exod. 16. and from thence 'tis owned a weekly Sabbath is to 
Ae obferved, that as God after the fix days of Creation did reft from 
\0 eating, fo they after fix days of labour fhould on the feventh keep 
■Sabbath ; which feven days were then (1 fuppofe) to be reckoned from 

the 



Digitized by the Center 



Ldventist Research 



112 



The ChrifiUn Sikkath. Part II. 

the firft raining of Manna Exod. 16". And therefore I do agree (Z?//r. 

from Gem. and Extd.it>. (jointly) a weekly Sabbath is well in- 
ferred thenceforth ; but not from Gen.x (fingly,)as you feem willing 
fometime to mif-take me. And therefore,whatever may be 
fttppofed from hence , here is woexprefi command recorded ( fuch as 
you demand for the Lords day,) it is not exprefiy /aid ( as I then told 
vou ) that All mankind muB, for ever after, obferve every Jeventh day, 
in every week of days, reckoned continually from the fit Si Creation i 
( thefe were my words 2>ifc. p. 4 ) To which your aniwer is ,( Re}.. 
p 6. ) The feventhday bleffedand Janilified Gen. z, a, j. dothincJude 
the jeventh day of every week afterwards in*a ctntinttaljttccejfkn or 
circulation of days and weeks. But how doth this from hence ap- 
pear ? unlefs we rauft take your word for it; (as Enq. p. jx) 

But then, why muft this Every whe re, begin jufi at Sunfet, (for 
which you are lo very pofitive ) ? Here is'no iuch IV >rd that, J find, 
nor anv mention of Evening and Morning, or of darknefi and light 
on the 'Seventh day. I do not doubt but there was (as on other dajs) 
light and darkjtefi, morning and evening, on this day alfo : But here's 
no notke taken of it, nor anv Empha/is put upon it. You fay, Tbu 
day was to begin as did the fi ft day and all the re&, (becauie you 
fay fo, ) that is, you fay, at Sunfet. But where is it written (and 
where fhould 1 read it) that the ■ Firft day did begin at -Sunfet! 
The First day did begin at the fame moment, as to ailthetoor/d; 
and why then mould not the Jeventh t but 'tis not Sunfet at the 
fame moment, all the' world over. You tell us {Repkv. 6<r.) Tptt 
know no place in the IVord where it is [aid that every fabbath after- 
ward was to begin the fame moment of time that - the jirft fabbatk 
began in faradife. ( I fuppofe, you meant fenfe, when you fo.fpeak, 
though i t be ill exprefied. ). 1 anfwer, Nor do I know, any place, in- tie 
Word where it is faid, that every fabbath afterward was to begin at 
Sun fet. Ycu tell 113^ there alfo, on what part of the fourth def 
the Sun was created is not certainly revealed that you know,, nor do h 
(I add alio, nor in what' Meridian, whether that ot Taradife, or 
ionic other, ) and I have told you likewife, Neither do we how 
at what time of' the- firft day God faid,. Let: there be light;, and 
therefore we do ridt know, how long it had been dark before the 
Morning began. And- 1 now tell you further, We do not jtnow 
on what p.vt of the (event h day, God hie fed and fanilified it. If 
you fay, God Janilified it by his Example all the day : then you 
refolve this fancJif cation into example, ( not a> Command ; ) If you 
think it f-'smifies Irrme nofitive Command; at what time of the day 
was th^t ? You'llTay, He defied all the day- ; and therefore, from the 

Begin. 



hit II. 



The Chrifttm Stbhth. 



Hi 



Beeinninf of it at Sun-fet. Whether it began *W*^f£* 
Koinun auction. That he Refledallthe day, I can d ow ^ 
)U t P fo he din on the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth ^;J^>^. 
■died from Creating, having finifhed that £'^ on * h *^fe 
f Bl that day,<you4W perhaps,) is the firft on which ho dro> 
ret? and \rC Come part of that day he did further fanftifytt.. .iSovr, 
hat 2tfLt£™ the firft "day wherein he di \f™^ 
srant vou ; but not the firft *»w»f wherein hedid fo reft, ly 
SJ ww on the fixth diy. - For the Creation of &s fu God 
m Zk rf lotion, (aAeaft, the ^7 e k ? 0 ^ 
W fonre while before the end of the fixth day, tor he did. at a 
that brim her to Adam, and give her to he hts wife mJUtutea 
fe« iS-Bwf t£ the Nuptial BenedMcn, Befrmtfuland 
Spf! which was after that! Refledfrem creating but Jg 
fore tie end of the Sixth day. But at what hour of that bi.vth 
7 day he fo refted, we know not, fo that we arc not 
gi I m Sabbath 'from the time of JSK t 

Tome pofitrve Ailing; which is not likely to have been a j Sag* 



lontemPiatmg boas mjimie ww» »/ TJJl Tl« 

( ftep d - ^1 this he did on the Sixth day. For, before thecrea- 
io?o Uv\ God brought to ^^^^^^ 
fowl of the air, and every living creature, ^/^^JS" 
S ZhIm, (to each according to it. nature as is fuppofed,) 
he called them that was lie name thereof Cm. ,9,10 . » that, 
his Contemplation, thereof, began on thtfixth day, and would ha e 
b«n for oughtwc know ) Every days work had he continued in 
Innocency, for the Six-days la/our/znA thetef of his brow, be- 
l ^otU after the fal!%*. *A*«>p ^?SX whether 
Ireat lofs ( as to what you can (hew us from this place ) whether 
%oe are to keep « Sabbath, and when tt is to begin. 

Yon ttU m ( W P- «■ ) F rm that Sabbatmng here, the feventb 
Jay ™ lid the Sabbath, ' Exod 10. 1 1 fhould have faid r ^om Gjdt 
Mm. ) But if it be fo called Exod zo. it is not fo called Gen. a. 
for for^yoo Years after. For the firft time we find the word 
fabbath, I Exod. 1% »: and then ver y and ipj . «r. ifijuj 
thich ^Uces 'tis called ii Sabhath(fbabbat) not rff Sabbath Jiajbabbat) 
I of a thing before known; bu/as a thing /Aw ^fj"^ 
when God h § ad fo given it them it is then«/W («r^ WW 
(theSakhth,) For that the Lord hath gmnyw the Sabbath, therefore^ 



Digitized by the Center 



iventist Research 



ii4 Chfijlim Sabbath. Part H. 

be giveibym on ihefixtb day the bread of m days. But we do not find 
dm he had before given them on the Sixth day the bread of two 
days, nor that it was before called a Sabbath* or that he had, before, 
given them a Sabbath, - Al\i\\] !i^v:;{ mUvO ^>7t\ 4 

But 'tis ra/iW (you fay) the 20.9. and throughout 

the Old and New Tefiament^ from the Hebrew root Shabath ^ 
/f// Sabbath.} I will not quarrel with you for telling us that it 
is 7fo ^itf/^ at Exod. 20. 9. becaufe it is fo in our Engljjb Tranf 
lattan. But it is not fo in the Original ijebrcw, but a Sabbath 
And fo in the parallel place Veut. j^. the feventbday is Shabbat : 
not Hajhabbat ; Much lets is it fo throughout tie Old and New Telia* 
ment But whether a Sabbath, or tie Sabbath it rs< hot fo called 
Jrom Shabath Jo Sabbatife,o: keep Sabbath ; bun from SAaiatb, toRe&. 
And ir, iBxod.zc. 11. where this is cited, as an inducement to the 
Sabbath there commanded, In fix days the, Lcrd made heaven and 
earth- and Jtefted t be f event b day, it is not vajijhbotb (from Ibabatb) 
but vajanacb (from nuacbj which is a fjtftiatKat} itaitado* that. 
vajifbbotb in the other place is not to be taken at ^forced fenfe ior 
fabbaiifmg (as you would have it) but 111 its plain native ii -mfica- 
uon in the fame fenfe with janacb for refting^ eeaf^beingqmet. 

And jf you had a mind to play the Critick { though, 1 doufrt,. 
your talent doth not ly that way) you might obfei.ve, that,, ac- 
cording to the 4 nalogy of the tKbrew.Tongue, the Nouns are wont 
to be derived from the Verbs, and not the Verbs from the Nouns : 
and accordingly we arc not to feck the fenfe of the Verb fhabath 
(foreB) from the Noun Sabbath ( as ij derived from hence, ) but, 
ot the Homjabbath, from that of the Verb to Reft. ( and your felf 
do here own, that the Verb Jbabafh is the Rool). i do.aot deny but 
that a Verb (in Hebrew) fometime (but rarely) may borrow (as at 
the rebound) a /econdary fgnification (in fome of its remoter Con- 
jugations ) froiTj :> Noun which had before ken derived from it in 
its proper ftnle. But it's no way likely that Jbabatb, in C*l I iu 
hrft Conjugation) Ihould borrow its fignifkatkn from: its. derivative 
Noun Jbabbat, which never came in ufc (that we know of] till is 00 

l if a t tC ^' , ln thl& * enfc ot ^^.-Cw^or wordfteimvale»tL 
the Vzrb fbaeatb is con/bntiy ufcd\ Gen, 8. zz. While t he earth rtt- 
Mivneth, feedtime, and hmveft, and ald y and heat^ mdfumvxr, and 
uinter, and day and night, Jhall net Ceafe. Wouldryau read it, 
ShaU not keep Sabbath t Prov, 18,18. The lot mahth contention 
toCeaje. is this to fabbat i/ f e ? Jofh, 12. The manna Ceafedontbe 
morrow P10v. 22.io. CaB out the f corner, and^firtf? aUrePrwj* 
fiatt Ceafe. Nehem. 4. 1 { . Onr advenes {'aid, Tkty mkto>> 

neither 



,Part II. The Chrifiian SaUatk 115 

neither fee, tiU we come in the midB amongB them, and flay. thetH\ 
and caufe theworJ^to Ceafe, Nebem. 6. 3, Why fhould/be mrkJCeafc r 
iHof 1.4. Tet a little while 1 and I will avenge the blood ofjezreel upon 
the houfe of Jehu, and wiU caufe to Ceafe tbe kingdom of thehouje'tkj 
Jfrael Lament,. $ : 1 4, 1 5- . The elders have €t*f rdfrom the gate] the 
young men from their mufiek ; Tbe joy of our hear t is Get fed r our dance 
■is turned into mourning, 2 Chron.ifj^. IVhen Baafha beard it ^ he left 
off building Raarnah, and lei his work^Ceafe. Exod. 1 1. tj\ i Te frail 
pm away (or taufejo Ceafe) leaven out of your b^ufes. Ezek. 34. iy. 
And I wiU^aufo^vtlbeafis t* Ceafe out of the land I aot ta ^tcp Sab- 
bath. ) And if thefe places be not enough/ I can furmfli yon with 
a gr^at many more, where jkabath doth certatnly^Jfigritfy to reft or 
ceafe ; not to fabbatife or kgep Sabbath. So that Gods Hefting or 
"Ccafitg to Create, proves nothing ai to the Beginning of the Sabbath. 
$!or that Reft began before the end oi thtftxtb day; and continued 
-beyond the end of the Seventh, Eighth^ Ntntb day y and (tor ought I 
ino\v) nil Now- And as fox the other words Blejjed arid ' fanfiifisd 
<///w,e do noimore^know an what time of the day thaii wai, than at 
what rime of the day God mVde the Stumor did, Let there benight. 
Nor is it at all likely that it was in the Evening, when Night and 
fieep were coming on. And therefore, il cur rule mufl be to begin 
om fanRtfying' the Sabbath when the Lyd began it (is Repi p. 61 ) 
fae ar$ yet to. feekwvhen thaf*sn*; 1© vr^NJ iu{m v:;b ihpv& 

Yet 1 4m. willing to think> and wld be glad to fee it proved, 
I (for I am no eneay to 2 Weekly Sabbath,) that here might be,a Sab- 
bath appointed, to be thenceforth obferved IVeekJy^ however dark- 
ly infinttatcd, ForftHink fomewhat lefs than an ExprejlCom- 
mand recorded may ferve to intimate Gods pleafure, (though nothing 
1 kfl will : ferve you for .the Loidt day^) The great oblhcle, it; 
That we have here no Command recorded, nor an v mention of 
/Wsihcre obferving it, nor any loatfteps ot fuch Ounfejucnt Pra* 
ffife (or fo much as the Name of Sabbath) for more than Two thott- 
fand five hundred lears after this time; and then accounted (not 
I from the firft Creation, but ) from the fifft Raining nj Manna from 
whence I am apt to thinkj\m it was not lo obiirved, or it was not 
Lneceflary for us to inewit But I find that a p ong and milling 
fanfy ( 2s your Language is Repl p. 3 S. ) rmke ym think you lee u \ 
But 1 cannot fee with thofe Spectacles. Let's fee your 'Proof 

Firft { you fay Repl. p. B. ) On the ( event h day God had ended Mi 
work whtcb "he had tyiade, and he JoMatifed ou fbe fevent b Jay from* a8 
bis work. Gcna.z, Ail this I can alio w, except the word Sabht^cd^ 

P 2 for 



tiyentist Researc 



1 16 The ChriftUn Sahbatk Part 1 1 . 

for thereaforis but now given. For the word there ufed fignifies nn 
more than to ReB or rather to Ceafe. If any where elfe Inch S$H 
do from other Circumftances of the place appear to be a Sabbatical 
Reft,this imift be from thofe other Gircnmftances^mt from the Signi- 
fication of the word Which fignifies but barely /o £e B ( if fo much ) 
or rather to Ccafe> For fo it is in all the places I cited, and in m&ny 
more. And I did fearch with fome diligence for a place where it 
might import a fieft (of acfuiefcence) but could not find it. (Per* 
haps you may.) I find fuch ac^uiejeenee intimated on thtfixth day % 
and {bine before, Cwi. 4, io, ix, 18; 21, 25- , 31. God f aw every thing 
fbat he had made ^ and behold it was very Good. But I find it not fo 
faid on the Seventh day, but that he Refted, that is Ceajed -to' create. 
Butw^tatevtr that ReB was, it was GW's Reft Mot Man s. 
. *h A fetoud* Evidence (you fay) U the fame repeated ver.3* Gcdblejfed 
the feventh day and faniiified it y becaufe that in it he bad rejlcd from all 
bis work which he had created and made. Here it is (by your own ci- 
tation}- he Retted from his work (not i# it,) that is^ ne Ceafed fo U 
work ; But all this is but One Retting, though it be fo faid iri tw 
verfes. And 'tis God s Refting, not Man\ 

Bur ? at this rate, you may fo husband it as to make this ferve 
for five or fix Evidences. 1- On the feventh day God ended his <wori, 
i\ that is, he jinijhed or perfeffed his work, namely by adding 
this Seventh day to his Work of fix days. a. He Refied 7 w Sabtatrfed f 
on the feventh day. 3. God blcfjtd the feventh day } - 4* He fdnffi- 

fied it. the fame repeated, Becaufe in it he had reftedfrm all his 
wwk. Yet ft ill it is but one Refting, and 'tis from his work which he 
had made ; and 'tis God s Refting, not Man's. It is not faid that Man 
retted from all his workwbich he had made. But J tis Mans Sabbat ifing 
that we are now inquiring for. If it had been faid, (as in the cafe of 
the Lords day) After eight days God refied again, and, with Adam and 
Eve. It would have been a better proof than all that you bring; 

A third Evidence, you fay, is in the cafe of Cain and Afal, Gen- 4« 3- 
In proceft of time Cain brought an offering to the Lzrd ; andvtx,^ Abel 
aljo brought his offering. Here is a precedent for Sacrifice ; but what's 
this to a Seventh-day Sabbath ? But here you tell us ( Enq p. %r t Rep. 
p. 8, ) that In grocejl of time\ is, in the Hebrew mi^katzjamfnifn, 
(you lhould have faid, jamim, not jammim; inxjammm fignifies 
Seas, not days) at the cutting off of days, or the end of days^ that is, 
it feems to you 7 at the end of the week ; becaufe after the feventh day 
they were to begin to reckon again. 1, 2, 3, &c. (that is, fuppofine them 
tia rcckonif weeks, which is the point in queftion. ) But why not 
as well tie tnd&f the M<mib ? (for then, we begin, to reckon again 



Disitized'bv the Centej 



Part II. Tk Cbrijtian Sdbath. "7 

i,a,3,&c. for the days of the next Month : ) or, why not the Tea / §* 
then again we begin to reckon 1,2,3, for the days .of the firft Month 
of the next Year. And, that they did reckon by Months, and^f-f, 
we know : 'but not that they did then reckon by Weeks ( before-that 
*fE*U i6. from the Raining tfManna.), Ut,Amfwprth tells you, 
at the end of days, that is at the end of the Year ( for that days mde- 
nnitely,doth often fo figntfy, * T^r; as you may there fee at large if 
you pleafe ; ) or elfe(as we tranllate it ) inprocejof time. Which 
I take to be the plain meaning of it without any further Critjciim. 
At the end.of days, or after days, that is, after fome days io 
Mark*. 1. i\ it**, a\ierdays, we tranllate afierfeme days.) Or, 
after many days ,' for it was many years a jer thifoftpry of Cam and 
Abel, was but a little before the fiirth tf Seth, gea. t V- wnu-h 
was when Adam was 130 years old, Gen,, $. a, So Judg. b . (m- 
> ,amim) after, days, is rendered after a time (that is, Aw* time after) 
Samp/on returned to take her, &c. But if none can tell us of am other 
tnd of days at that time, this is a good Evidence, you fay, that theje 
Offerings were on the Seventh-day Safrfath. If lhat be all, / can tell 
Vou, The end of . the Month, and the end of the Tear, are ^the end of 
bays, as much as the end of the fVeek : and thofe we be Aire of, 
' this we are not. I doubt fuch Evidence would lcarcc be thought 
G&od Evidence iaf^ejitninfier-haU, . 

The fourth Evidence ypu tell us, ApAp. 9 . ts from Gen $.11. 
Enoch walked with God dree hundred j^ears. WeU, what s this to a 
Seventh-day Sabbath? Is it faid he kept a Sabbath three hundred 
years < No : But Enoch you i^,ims a Trophet,}\\&t ver bis, and pro- 
phefied of the Lords coming to execute judgment, and to convince all 
the ungodly. What's this to a Seventh-day Sabbath? HowfoitU 
Enoch, you fay, convince others, if bitnfelf did not keep the Sabbath f 
But flay a while : The Text you cite doth not fay that Enoch was 
to convince them, but he prophefied the Lord would come to convince 
them. And, of what were they to be convinced ? of all their ungodly 
deeds and all their hardfpeeches againH him (the Lord.) Here's no- 
r thing of a Sabbath. Could there be no ungodly deeds or hardjpeeches 
againB the Lord, uniefs a Sabbath were then to be kept ? 

Another Evidence, had been 13.) lrm " ff f* l ^ h>hMi 

6,n,8,p,io. (as here you cite it Jlep.p.io.) where fpeakmg or Abram 
and Lot's great number of cattel, it is laid ver. 6. the land was not 
able to bear them that they might dwell together (lailiebeth") for their 
fubllattte was great Jo that they could mt (lafhebeth) Dwell together; 
that is, (you would'ha vc it) they could notfabbatife together. But 
this you ate.(ypon fecond thoughts) consented to quit; becaufe you 



1 1 $ !fik G&r//?/** £f£to&. Pact J J. 

be now aware that lajhebeth is not formed from fbabath (to refit? or 
fabbatife as you would have it) but from jafhab y to 2>weUi There- 
tore this gives us no further trouble. : w&i ma srii !o; 

The next Evidence (which is now the fifth) is from Gen. a6. 
Abraham obeyed my voice y and kept my charge, my commandments, ftp 
Jlatutes and my laws: And therefore, y<ta think, he kept a Sabbath. 
But that's theQuefhon : whether to keep a Sabbath were tbbt a Law. 
It was indeed a Law at Exod. 16. but this was long after Abraham 1 
time. You fay, 'tis faid in Exod. i<S.a7,i&. Howlrngmllye refufeto 
keep my commandments; and the commandment wWichlfiaeltfanho&t, 
was, tbatfome of them on the Seve)tfh-d*ywe*t6utu father. Manna. 
. Which was a t\ih% whieh God*had tfewly forbid wi.i^i if, a£ But 
did <iod forbifli^rafo^ ^ft> gather Manna on tbefeventh dart You 
tell us f /?<•/>/. p.p. ) that Righteous Abel> was a perWc^ienUeGW 
things; and that Enoch walked witJ> God; niult we' therefore 
conclude, that ^ were circumcijedj becaufe.Gad wofc. afterward 
«vjr) ;r/>/6 Mofes Exod 4. 20. /*r cirCumctfingx.bechtbdt^x fuch 
is your Argument : God was *»gr/ with thol^Xvho^ woiritf ^«/4«T 
Matira o n the feventh day ( which God had rhctttaewi? forbidden) 
therefore Abraham kept a Sabbath. As to what you fay, Hep!, p. 1 1 
If the law Broken by >thc Ifraelites Exod. 16. were the feventh day 
Sabbat b, ( meaning the then Jewifl* Sabbath ) then 'tis veryti&y, ons 
of the taw kept by Abraham, Gen\n6. Not fo; fcr this (concern- 
ing Manna) wis given long after Abraham* time. You migbt\<& 
well arguc^ that '//* the law Broken by Mofes, (was that of Circum:r- 
/ton; then % th Stay Mely one of the Laws kept, by Righteous Abel 
You fay, p. \i. The Dr. do 'b neither offer itor prttend that Abraham 
brake the Sabbath: I anfwer, And the Lawyer doth not produce one 
Precedent that either He or any man ef/e 7 did keep it, before.tkac 
time ; or that ic was his Duty fo to do. You (hould firft mike it 
evident that it was His duty, and that he knew it fo to be, and that 
that day, before his tim^, was not irrecoverably Forgotten. For 
this you telj us that, This being implanted in Adam, wfo was created 
in Gods imnge, it might be ( you lhould have proved that it was) 
taught down along from Adam in gracious Families from Father U 
Sott } ; and fo to Abraham. But,^i*ft, this being a Pbfitive Law 
(not Natural) is not one of thofe^whkh are prefumcd to, be r>tf- 
r.hw/ea in his Nature. You lhould next fliew that t hi Lnv v > 

:n to hi in in hnocency, before he had (by the Fall ) defaced Guds 
iti/oge wr him. You fliould thirdly take nonce that TraJition\{fc0tt\ 
rather to Son) is what you are always mveigbing again fcs:ia 
thing of uv Au&Mfy. 4<ou fhoujd fourthly cooler ih*c*tfe 



Part II. The ChriJliin Sabbath. n 9 

Law of Marriage, was as old, if not older, than you can pretend 
that of the Sabbath to be (Gen. 1.2.7 and Gen. the Purport of 

which was ( you tell us )1 bey Two /hall be one Flejh : not they three, 
four, or five: muft we thence cone liide that Abraham did not £0/0 
fo Hagar ! The like of Jacob and many others. And do not your 
felf tell us that Polygamy prevailed from Lamech to Malatbt ? even 
on divers eminent jn the Church > You Ibould therefore bring fbme 
better Argument, than that they were good men y 10 prove that they 
did then obferve a Sabbath. The Feaft of Tabtrnacles was a paic 
of Gods Jnjlitated worfbip ; and 2>avid^\s a : GWman, a man af- 
ter Gods own beart y except in dje mutter of Urtab ; will it thence 
[fcllpwy that 2>avid kept the Feaft ofTahrmkfil No ; for we are 1 
exprefly told? Neb.%. 17. din froto the days of ' Jijbua the Jon if 
Aun, to that day, it had not been done. We muft therefore have 
better Evidence, than thit Abra\bam was a good man, to- prove tha t 
he kiptthe Sabbat b. Foe it niiyh t r pdli bifc, be A duty, o* it migh c 
poflibJjJbare been ianegleSU^foxttrmmoxoilx^)^ that the 
pr*cifeV#jr migJu bc fif&tton ^in^ti fo, it was paft recovery. 

The fix th Evidence (.wfakk is your lafl ) you tell Us Rep. p. \\ K 
hfiom Kxod. 5-. y. { on which yort delcant for three pages ) tfhixh 
founts to this : When Mofes and Aarctti had;dcfiRd Pharatk to let 
fy'aetfr tire* dafxyomttcyinto the wiJdvnefihfacrifoe to the Lor d y 
^wh *t$^?Wty dojrtn binder the people ft cm their wo> k 1 the 
people are many, and you make them Reft fromtbeir burdens ; that is, 
fry you, Touwake them ieef a Sabbath ; becaufe hjbbattem {ycu nuile 
tkem uft or ceafe ) is a dermVrvc from the word fbabath { to resist 
ttofc ) from whenee.the word Sabbath is alfodenved.: which I think 
Stovexy littk to the purpofe. If &fofg\ and Aaron had defired Pba- 
mhj to exeufc thciti froin their work we day in feven\ thi^ would 
fevc looked like m Argument that they had, intended bent* forth 
fe^keep z Weekly Sabbath { not, that they had done ikfttberfy which 
» the point in uuefhonj but whether jufbon ftch day (and no^lher) 
to (houH fee tie f event b m conrf e eontmuaifa. fi \om> the firft Crea- 
tion, (which I doubt was viol then knowa*nQi\is sow^J would; not 
ven iro m .hence appear. And tk>t the word fbaiaib doth not fig. 
*fy tQ:keep a Sabbati, but- ba*dy to reft, or ceafe, is fuflfoiently 
*cd aiready. If you lay att ErophaGs on jjfhkaMm fa tbe Cou* 
ation HipbHy as you-tclLus Repl. p. ) \\% the fame V^rb, ; in 
\ $vtm Conjugation, Prov. *&. iS. The Lot mhlboWWions to 
**Je [not to keep Sabbath i) And fo art Ncketh. 4. 1 1. And Fioj, 1.4. 
J %Ck. % 16. 7. And Exod. tx,t s . And E»Jt. ?4 if. before u+ 
And in* many other places which I forbear to cite. So that 

this 



gitized by the Center *~ J^vpnHst Research 



120 



Tbt Chfifttin Sabbath- 



Part If. 




\vhat f you are wont ttt'caU 'dark Cmjeffares, we have no Word for 
it By three days journey in the wtldcrnefi, you think may be meant 
Mount Horeb (it may be lb ) which ( you fay ) Geographers obftrv: 
(without hinder am:) was about three das journey, (but then, they, 
their wives, children, and.cattel, muft make great marches to get 
thither in three days ; for it was at leafl three days journey before 
they got to the Red-fea, Num. i j. y, 6, y) where ("acMount Hweb) 
the Uvu for the Sabbath Uciu fzy) -was reinforced, (and it muft be 
fuppofed, that Pharaoh knew this, which they did not then know 
ihemielves ; elfe what doth this figmfy as to Pharaohs Anfweri) 
And even this ( if it were to keep a Sabbath ) refers onely to what 
they were afterward to do (and we own that after the Law at/ft- 
rek or Smai, a Sabbath was to be kept) it fays nothing as to the Time 
paH (which is what you were to prove ) that it bad been thus kept 
continually ( without interruption ) from Gods ceafing to create, hi- 
therto, which yon would prove fromhence, v,*:WA j\*A ; 

What you fay Rep. p. i J- of a Sabbath obferved Exod. 16. [ from 
the firft raining of Mmtdjbefore the Law at Sinai; is nothing to the 
prefent purpofe. That there was a Sabbath appointed from the fim 
raining of t$f*nna, is agreed ; the tmefttoais, whether it were ob- 
ferved before that time. ^ w*) <**«™ ™fj 
' I had fnggefled(Z>//i-.P. 34-) another proof as to this point (for 
I am not fo averfe from that 



in 



of the Weekly Sabbath being obferved 
,. 'that'lnKrval","b«t that I would be glad to fee it well proved ) 
from 'Pharaohs feven fat kine and jeven lean ones, and the [even-full 
ears and (even empty ; from the Beafts and Fowls coming aim 
the Ark by Sevens, Gen. 1- h |- Gen. 8. zo. and from three dilfano 
Intervals of Seven days diftinSly noted, Gen. 7. 4, and 8. 10, ri. 
within the compafs of one Year. Which I thought to be a better Ar- 
gument {as to this matter of fa£t ) than any you bring. To which 
tour Reply is (Repl- p- ) Tw hope I wtU mt oblige you or any 
other, to believe I Jo think. ( A very obliging Com pkment ! ) ButI 
do think fo, what ever you will be obliged to bejteye. For the trt^from their burdens ; 



is, 
Exod 



Part IT. Th Chrsfii* Sabbath. iit 

Vet is the heft I meet with, for meafuring their time by weeks. And 
I would not have yon think the worfe of it, for my fuggeftin° ir. 
As to that Expreflion of Nebuchadnezzar's being feven years at grafs ; 0 
'tis a rough Expreflion ( I was about to fay rude ) but 'tis your Ex' 
preffion, not mine; I gave you the words of Scripture, Dan. 4. 
fft IhZ}- Nebuchadnezzar s being feven years tamed out to the 
beafts of the field. But this Evidence is by you difcarded, as none 
of yours ; and therefore I prefs it no further. 

Let us then/aw up the Evidence as you lay it. The point in iflu? t 
Whether, after God's Ceafing from the work of Creation Gen. k. 
before the appointing- a Sabbath, upon the Raining of zJManna, 
i6\ they did, during that whole interval, all the while di- 
vide their time by Weeks, and #n evstyfeventb day of fuch. Weeks 
( reckoned continually from that day of God's Ceafing to create) 
keep a Weekly Sabbath, and that the Sabbath afterward from the 
fill raining oftJMunna, and that of the Fourth Commandment, was 
but a Continuation of that Sabbath, on fuch Seventh day in courfe 
from the firB Creation, and no other. For which your Evidence is, 
That Inprocefs of time, or { as you will have it ) at the end of days, 
that is ( as I underfiand it ) after fame days, or many days ( about 1 j o 
Years ) Cain and Abel brought their offerings ; which you take to be 
at the end,not offorae Tear, or Month, but at the end of fame week (be- 
caufe this heft fuits your purpofe) not of the next week (for Cain and 
Abel were not then born) but of fome week about 1 jo years after. 
That Enoch (about joo years after this ) walked with God, and pro- 
phefied of the Lords coming to judgment, to convince all ungodly men 
of alt thetr ungodly deeds and hard words again}! the Lord; and may be 
fuppofed ( if Fuch Sabbath wcjse then a duty, and the day known) to 
have kept a Sabbath Th«"( about 11 or 13 hundred years after 
this ) Abraham ( a very good man ) is faid to have kept all Gods Com- 
mandments^ (not\rithUanding that of Polygamy wnhBagar) and 
therefore, 'tis hoped, ( if fuch Sabbath were a duty and the day known 
to him, ) might keep fftch Weekly Sabbath, on that day. And ( about 
4i o years after this ) when tSMofis and Aaron deflred Pharaoh to let 



? Jfrael go three days journey into the wildernefs to facrtfice to the 
Lord ; he fays to them, Tou hinder their work, and make them ceafe 
and therefore you think they did then, and 



uent ufe of the number Seven in Scripture ^.ddthj to me [ tver before that time, keep fuch Weekly Sabbath, and juft upon 
lent that Number as more than ordinarily conjiderable ; and thoft|that Seventh day in courfe from the firft Creation. And I muft 
three diflinB Intervals, of Seven days eac b, particularly noted withinl l eavc it to the Jury, whether they will find all that upon this 
the compafs of one Year,is that which(to me)feemsthe greateltln-l Evidence. 

timation of any which I meet with,of days then wont to be reckone«| . Now on the other hand ( though I would be content ic were fo) 



hy Sevens ;■ and thoogh I do not take it'to be a ancjafive &gumt»li . 



yet 



l%% The ChrifiUn Sabbath. Part IL 

yet it feeras to me fomewhat ftrange ; if it were fo conftantly ob- 
ferved, and juft upon that day and no other, that we neither find 

%any Command for lo doing Gen. a. nor fo much as the name of Sab- 
bath there mentioned, nor any where elfe for more than 2^00 years, 
nor any mention ( in the whole hiiiory of that time ) of any that 
kept it, nor of any blamed for not keeping it (which after that 
time was very frequent,) and that in all thofe long Difcourfes in 
the Book of Job, none of his Friends^mongft the many faults they 
charge hira with ) fhould ever ikmk of charging him with a 
neglcft of the Sabbath day : And that he, when he was fo jealous 
of his Sons Curfing God m then heart in the midft of their Feaft- 
ings, as that he did every day offer facrifice on their behalf, fhould 
never blame them for fuch Feafting tor Seven days together, without 
any Sabbath (for ought appears)? iritervening; nor take notice of 
the difafter that befel them as a hand of God upon them* for fuch 
negle&of the Sabbath; nor any of his Friends fuggeft any fuch 
conlidcration : Which makes me doubtful^ that fuch Sabbath had 
not been obferved during; that Interval,, or h*d> ldrig before this 
time been negle&cd and the day forgot ten. i\vwt^*\ u IT 

But after Jfrael came out of Egypt it is agreed^ that God gave 
them a Sabbath, { whether then new, or then renewed, I lift not to 
difpute.) Andjthat then it was the feventb day in courfe from the firH 
ruinmgtf MamaJ. think is agreed alfo. Whethef this from ihefirH 
raining of Manna; be alio the feventb in coutjtfrom tbtfirB Crt^m^ 
neither You nor I know, norany Man eKc. We may tbintji is, or 
we thmiiit is not, but we cannot know it : We have no fVord for 
it ; and you .bririg -nothing to prove ifrbut dark Gonjeffurm. • The 
word Sanfibjy doth not neoeflanly figitfy to Inftitute, but to Cele- 
brate, and,in the Fourth Commandmfcrttyhe hmtiwrd (Kiddefb) and 
m the fame Conjugation, is indifferently applied fo Go* and to Ma* 
(Exod.' 2,0 8 7 lT/) bwMan did not Infhtute. ^That (jod did B/efs 
and Sanctify, that is, by fomt&lejfed Aft he did fpecially fignalite 
that feventb day ( the firH day on which he did notcteate, ) ifs Very 
clear ; And fo he did the fir ft day of Ckrift's Refurre&im -declaring 
mightily our LordJefusChtiH to be the Son of God by tbe'jlefttxrctthn 
from the d?ad, Rom. 1.4. which dayChrift did Ct/efrate, \vith his 
uifciples, more than Ottce; ( and they oftW afterward ; ) which vet 
you will not allow t6 fccih In/iimti(m. And what you tfrge, that 
\ at Exod. f i5. ) we have no /0W that the day was 'cbatigtil, y<>\\ 
pJeafe your felf wkh\putting TwoQiieftiorkS into One'(-as oft you 
do) and then putting the Proof on the wrong fide : That it was t%in 
on tht Sev*nth4a/irdi^efir(tN^ 

tr{ . . £X. «t but 



Part II. The Chriftit* Sabbath. 1 2 5 

but whether fo from the firH Creation 'tis You are to prove. The 
Point is clear on Our fide, the Doubt is on Yours. Tis you are* 
to bring a Word to prove, that a day was before obferved, and that 

\ • .Von think it ftrange that I fhould take this ( from the firH raining 
of Manna) to be a new Epoch* (or time to reckon from, ) and not 
a continuation of the old. My Rcafon for it, is becaufe I think 
that the feventb in courfe from the fitH Creation, had either not 
been obferved at all, or had long before this time been forgotten 
' find I gave you this .further Reafbn fot it, becaufe (Saturday) th# 
dap. next before the Raining of Manna, feems not to have been 
a Sabbath ( as it ought to have been if t this were a continuation ot 
a former eourfe of Sabbaths) for, on that day, the Quails came up 
and coveted die Camp, and they ^werc not forbid H gather thetti p 
Exod. 16.8, 13. but on (Saturday) the feventb day after, they ar* 
forbid to gather Manna, becaufe K was the Sabbath, ver s, xz, 2^1? , 
2,0. Which fliews a manifeft difference between thofe two Satur- 
days. And.that they did a&pally gather the Quaik that day, ap- 
pears Numb. 11 }x, where 'tis ex^refly faid, That they gathered 
Sffails, al! that day, (that is, all the remainder of that day nextbe- 
fore the raining of Manna,) and aU that night, and #/ the next day. 

That the feventh day Sabbath from the Creation,- if at all ob- 
ferved at firft, might in the fpac* of 1500 yeajs catoe tobe negleft- 
t& and forgotten, is not ftranga, if we confide? that the Tafs^er 
had fo been from the days of King So&mo* to •ffizctiab'l time ; and 
the Feaft of Tabernacles, from, theidays of Jojhuab the fon of Nun, 
till the days of Nebemiab ; and 'if* this feventh day from (he firfi 
Creation came once to be forgotten, it could not be reftoved again 
( without a Miraek ) as thoie other Feafts might ; and muft there- 
fore he thenceforth no more obferved, or elfeitom fome aew begin- 
ning. And that there- might be:fuch ncwl&gtnnirtjg (a&fifomtbe fidfc 
raining of Manna) is not ftrange, fince we fee the fame as to the 
Beginning of the Tear, Exod. 1 i.i. This month pall be untoyonthe be- 
ginning of months jt (ball be the firH month of theTear to you. At what 
Month they did before begin their Year, is not certain ; bivt from 
thenceforth it was to begin at the Month Ahib or Nifan. So neither 
uncertain on what day they did before begin their fVeek (if at all 
they hadWceki)but from thenceforth they were to begin it from the 
ftventh day from the firft raining ofMannahutfoom what part of that 
day, it is not faid. ; Tis therefore incumbent on You to prove (if you 
can) that (nbtwithltmdmg thefeprefilmptions)a weekly Sabbath was 
fe/crrobfei*ved,ahd jujiutxon that day, and thac it did begin/*^ at Sun- 
feL < N Q. 2 Your ' 



124 Tk ChrifiUn Sabbttk fart II. 

Your next Step, i S) That this Seventh-day Sabbath of the Jews. 
■ was (before the entrance of Sin) given in Paradife, to all Mankind] 
and by Chrift our Mediator zndRedeemer : which you have not yet 
proved, as we (hewed before. That it was not by all Mankind ge- 
nerally Oaferved (but by the Jews onely, in their time,) I think you 
doagree. For that it was to be a Vijlinahe Sign you grant ; and I 
think it was to diftinguifh thofeof ffrael from other Nations (be- 
came it is exprcfly faid, a Sign between Me and the Children of If 
rael, Exod. j 1. 17.) You think it is, to dijlmguijh Gods people from 
others : But it comes much to one, for you tell us alfo, that ffrael 
m Egypt was the whole vifible Church; fo that Gods people, and the 
people of the Jews, will be much the fame. And therefore, I pre- 
f ume, you do not think that any other National the jews and their 
frtfelytcs ( Jews natural,™ Jews natural/zed) did obferve the Tewlfh 
JWDbath. How could it elCe be a Di/linffivc mark. 

And I do not find that any other Nation but the Jews, (nor they 
till af ter their coming out of Egypt ) did keep any Sabbath at all, or 
lo much as meafurc their time by Weeks ( of (even days) for many 

Fol ^ r ll ? ls time » nor car]i€r (*« 1 k »°w of) than the times 
ol Gnnibanity, when the Obfervatim of the Lords day did intro- 
duce that of where Chiiftianity was received. This I told 

"Jv? t,mc P- *■ ro * llich y° u °wk no Reply, but that 
eiWr. Chafy you think, is exprefly for it, Repl. p. 16. (but you give 
us no proof either of his or your own. ) But if Mr. Chafy did think 
io ( without any proof) arc you willing ( in this Difpute) to be 
concluded by Mr. Chaffs Opinion ? If not, why fhould I ? If Mr. 
Lhafys Opinion, or the common Opinion (as fbmeuines you fpeak) are 
to conclude You and Me ; this Difpute (of a Saturday-Sabbath) will 
befoondeterniined. But if it be Mr. Chafy's Opinion, then it is 
( I fuppofe) Mr. Chafy 's Mftake. But the way of Argument between 
us two, is, What Word is there for it ? and where is it fo mitten f 
Yet 1 am herein fo fur with you, that if you fliew me any Au- 
thor (lacred or prophane) older than Chrtftianity, who tells us of 
any Nation ( other than the Jews) who did (before Ch rift's time ) 
"leafure their time by Weeks (of feven days) I will admit it (fo far) 
as a competent Proof There may perhaps be fucb (and therefore 
a ♦ i? T l * j* reB, ptt>nr m the Negative ) But I do not remember 
that hitherto I have met any fuch. And when I made out bi s fair 

with Worfhipmg the Sun upon Sunday, without attempting to Lw 
tha " h ^'^J*forc Chrift) did obferve weeks at all 

. *hall now tell tyou further, that as late asOwV and Augnftuss 

time, 



Part II- Th Chrift*n Sdbtth. 12c 

time, flicit Week (if you will give me leave to call it a Week) wis 

' a week of eight days ( not of Seven days) which is not to your pur- 
pofe, but dire&ly againft it. 

I Dr. Beverage tells of fuch a Week of Eight days in jtuguflus's time 
at Rome ; as appearing by a Stone there digged up, containing a 
Roman Cole ndar, to that puipofe. And Ovid tells us the fame in 

S his Faft.lib. t. verf. j-4. very diftinftly,of this amongft other days. 
Est quoq; qui Nona femper ah Orbe redit. 
There is ( he fays ) a day -which doth, in a continual circulation, on the 
Ninth day return again; meaning their Nundin* or Market-day. 
Which thence had its Name of Nundina , quafi Novendina, as 
Vofftas (in his Etymohgtcum ) and other Cr it ices obferve. Whereas 
if they had difUnguifhcd their time into Weeks of feven days, no 
doubt but their Markets would return on the Eighth day ( or, 
as we fpeak, on that day jennight, ) the fame day of the next 

1 Week. Of which if you defire to fee more, you may confult a 
Large Volume of Commentators on Ovid's Works, printed at Frank- 
ford 'in the year 160 1. in their Notes on this Verfe of Ovid Where 
we have this Roman Calendar at large ; and therein the Eight days 
of their Week are defigned by the Eight Letters ABCDEF GH, 

! iuft as, in our Calendars, our Seven days are defigned by the Seven 

[ Letters, ABCDEFG. And fo from the beginning of the Ca- 
lendar to the end,*as is in ours. Which Calendar is there tran- 
ftribed from Faulus Manutius, in whofe Works it is to be feen alfo, 
(and, I think, more than once,) and (I am told) in other Authors 

[ alfo. l Tis plain therefore, that fo late as Auguflus, the Romans 

I did not diflinguifh their time into Weeks of feven days 1 Nor do I 
know of any People that did fo, except ihejews. 

And this leads me to another Fanfy of yours, ofwotjhiping the Sun 
upon Sunday ; of which you leem very fond. For we are reproached 
with this Sun-wot fop t or mrfbiping the Sun upon Sunday , above 
fourty times. And Enq. p. 88. you would have it thought to be fo 
in Job * time, and the name oi our Week-days fo ancient. And 
I tell us Em. p.90. a Romantic k Story out of Ferftegan ( but without 
I any proof of what he fays ) of our Saxon Anceftws .- who yet were 
' later than the beginning of Chriftianity ; and therefore nothing to 
' the purpofeifbis Story had been true. I had anfwered all this fo 
fully, and {hewed you the true Original of the Names of our 
Weekdays, Life. p. 63, 64, 6s, 66. and that (for ought appears) they 
I be later than Chrift's time ; that, if you had not been very fond of 
the Fanfy, you would not again (as you do often in your Reply ) 
.1 run 



126 Tht Chriftim Sibbxtb. Part II. 

run Tfmfms upen»it, without' bringing any proof for it But Mr. 
Chaff's ■authority to which you refer us Rep. p. 5T, jo", J"> But; 
when you can (hew any Writer ( Heathen or Chriftnn ) older than 
Chriftianity, who mentions any of the Weekdays by any of thofe 
Name j,(orind~eed who mention any Weeks of Seven-days, other than 
taofe of the Jews,) it will be time to think further of it^- The oldelt 
Heathen Author that I can find to mention them, is Dio C*ffius,\\ T hd 
lived about 230 years"arter Chrift's time; who tells us it was then 
a New thing) unknown to the Ancient Greeks. You ought therefore 
to have {hewed, if you could, that fome Author, older than Chri* 
ltianity,had fomewhere ufed fome of thofe Names. Which you hawe 
not dohe^ and I believe cannot do. And therefore your whok Story 
of wor/bipiKg the Sun upon Sunday, mot e than upon other day of the 
week fif they had fucn weeks )or in contradiltin&ion to other days, 
is I ihirik,. a Groundless Fanfy ,if not a contumelious Reproach on the 
Cbriftian* Religion. , >l •-. 'utyvt .0 rh^ff 

I ihould now have done with this, but that I find my ftlf here 
c&igjflPwMtwhat I can by no means admit. I 1 v >cfj m\vu\ 

'Yau tejf its Re pi pifi'. 'The Original of tbafe Names of.Days tie 
Dr. -agrees to- be from Hekthenip Idols. And p. j-8. The Names of 
lbs 'Days of the Week, be Idolatrous, as the Dr. agrees. And again, 
If "the Do^or will retain the old Idol Names without fcruple, not- 
withstanding his own acknowledgment whence they' are, you cannot help, 
it. And yet again,/* find of holding faff the Idol Names of Days. ■' 

Hold ! hold ! not too fall. Wheredoth the Dotlor agree that the 
original of thofe Names is Idolatrous ? or from Heathenifh Idols ? or 
any thing to that purpofe ? Surely the Reader may think, that the 
Dotlor had faid fome fuch thing, or elfe you would not fo confidently 
have faid it of him. I challenge you to fhew,if you can, any Saying 
of mine to that purpofe. I had laid Difc.-f.66. that they are Treea- 
rtous and ajfgned at pleafure, (is having no firm foundation,: that I 
ksow of,in Natural Phi Ibfophy,) which is the utmofl youampretend 
to, as of mine : But do you think, all that is Precarious (in Natural 
Philofophy) or Names 'imp'ofed at -pleafure, to be therefore Idolatrous. 
Thofe who gave Names to yon and Me, did arbitrarily give us our 
Names. They might have calied¥ou^»,and Me Thomas,^ they had 
fo thoiigh t fit, (and then our Names wbu!d have been fo, which now 
are othenvife.) ButI hope there was nothing at Idolatry in the cafe. 

You lay, The Sun and Moon^ &c. ( from whence they are named) 
were Heatheni/h Idols. Hold there ! The Idols of the Heathen are 
fiver arid gold, the work'Df mens 'hands, ( or perhapsof meaner ma- 
terials;.) But the Moon, and Stars, are the gaod Crexfmes of* 

. " God 



Part II. Tbt Chrifun Sabbiih. 127 

[Ct*\ made for the benefit and ufe of Man. May we not Name the 
Sun and Moon becaufe fome Heathens have worked them ? Sure 
U c may. When any are fo vain as to wtjbtp them, this doth not 
! make them Idols (agaiiifttheSwcmdCommttdmenty butMf C»rff 
(againft the Firfl : ) 'tis rather Tolytheijm than Idolatry m ftnetnefs . 
of Speech. 'Tis true that an Image of the Sun or Moon (if made 
to be worfhiped) may become an Idol, (and fo m&y an Image of GW 
alfo,) but this doth not make the San and Mom to be lads. The 
Sign of the Sun, the Moon, the Star, the Seven Stats, upon a Sign- 
Poll in London, (which give names to the Shop or Houle where they 
hang,) I do not take to be Idolatrous : And I know not why they 
may not as well give names to a Day, as to a Hottje. 1 know no more 
Idolatry inSunday, thm the Sun-lavetn, or &fars-bU. 

We are exprefly forbid (you fay Rep p. j8) to mention the Names 
of Idols. But I do not take the Sun, Moon, and Stars to bc /#; 
' at leaf! nbtjtoi Idols as we may not name. Or, if fo, why do; YOu 
•■name them'f And if the names of Idols may not at all he taintdby 
m ; How ii it thnz you tell us of Saalmd Molech ? &7. p. 8 b, 89. 
indhow is it that we come to hear of Baalim and JJbtcrotb ^ and 
■Milehom, and Remphan? of Jupiter, Mars, Merevry, Dtana, Caftor 
and VoMux, in :the facred Writers r ? ... 

I defire you id forbear hereafter ( without giving it znybard 
word} to faV The DotlbY '/greet, that the Original of thefc Names 
is Idolatrous. What you or others may think of it (who rake down 
without chewing miVRomaHtkk Story) I leave to them : But/ do 
not agree, nor do I think it to be Idolatrous. And you might have 
known that I do hot : I am fure you cannot kpm that / do My Words 
:*ere plain, and full, (Drfc. V :66.) Whether on each of theje Days, 
■they did wrjhip thofe tfjpcejrve "Planets, as fv many Gods, legnmtjuy; 

do I think it. I had tcfld you very plainly (and yfeu could hard- 
ly miftake me, exempt wilfully) from whence 1 thought theft names 
were taken, and from whence they were not, Difc./>. 6>, 66*, 67. Not 
from the number of the Heathen Gods (as if they had been but 
Set-en; ) but from the number of the Seven tlantts, (which I do not 
take to be Gods, but the gosdCrea twes of God : ) and not from a Rt- 
■fowwbutan /y^foV^^Waccdrint ; and,how they came 
to be fo called, and in this order. And, of what Jntiquity : Not olda 
than Chriftianity. And therefore you do mf wrong to fay the 2)aff* 
-meet it to be idolatrous. I faid ortely it was Precarious ( not idola- 
trous) But, it feenis, if I grant an Inch, you'l take an Ell. Now 
whether this he rtt,. Jrtifice, ox Legerdemain, ( thus to Palm upon 
•mfcjl whtther Jmfojingupcn the Reader'SnlptJing upon all tbt>Worfd,to 
StCP f ' pis* 



i a8 The Chript* y Sabbath* Part II. 

pre-po^ and prejudice theReader,i very ill Bleat ^highly blameable 
or what other hard name to give it(out of your copia verhorttm or Ac<u 
demy of Complements) I fhaU leave it to the Reader. I am loth to 
call it Slander or Calumny; But I am fure it is not/air PraBife. 

I conrels I might have fpared faying fo much, as that it was Pre. 
carious, ii I had known what improvement would have been made 
of that word; Idoufually Avoid delivering an Opinion, in cafes 
by the by, which might fuggefl matter of" difpute between us. But 
I find that, even lo, I am not fecure: For if I do not fay what you 
would have me, then (as if you were drawing a Chancery-Bill) you 
will fay it for me; and if then I do not exprefly Deny it, you will 
take it for granted. Thus when, t 0 that Objection, itntCbriftmajl 
a of Humane Injhtution, I had anfwered (Z>ifc. p. i 3 .) Be it fa 
( that is. If it be fo, or Suppofe it be fo) hut the PaS-over wis of Z>* 
vine Infittutim ; yet,&c. Now becaufe I had not told 'you, what I 
think of Cbrtfimafi you will {Rep/, p. j.J Where firft you 
change my Be tt Jo into So be it, and then into f admit itiho: 
and then, this lays a/tde all Holy-days of humane Infiitutkn ; as if I 
had laid fo And the like very often. But I am not now anfwering 
a Lbancery-Btll : and therefore I do not allow you to take my Silence 
to be Confent. As when (En ? . p.8 P . ) you fuggefl, as if aVivine 
might not wear a Black Gown (as well as a Barriffer) without being 
reputed one of the (Black-coat) Chemarims, whom God threatens to 
cut ojf : I would not be thought of that Opinion, though I did let 
"f'7'™, aD Anfwer, as being nothing to the purpofc of a 
Saturday Sabbath. 

Butktmedefireyou (before we part) not as an Adverfary, but 
as a Friend, not to be too lavifhof your language in reproaching the 
Lords day; even what we take to be the Lords-day. It may be I for 
ought you know) what we call it. You know it hath been fo 
thought by the Generality of Cbriftians all along, and is fo at this 
day. And though you may think your felf herein Wifer than all 
Mankind yet you may be miftaken : And (if fo) then, WhofeZW 
is.it and whofe Worfbip, which you fo of t reproach KWorfhipinr 
the Sun upon Sunday? f is not fumble to that tenderneft that you 
lometmieprofefs, to venture fo daringly upon that wherein, if you 
be miftaken you be dangeroufly miftaken; and 'tis highly blameable 
( if 1 may ufe your own wortfs ) io to Venture. I can bear the re- 
proaches you call .upon me all [along, ( without any juft occafionfor 
being lo charged,) but I would not have you reproach the Lords day 

I have now done with your Reply, fo far as I thought needfuf to 
take notice of it. Many things I have let pafs, as not pertaining to 
" . this 



Fart II. The Chriftian Sabbath. 129 

this bufinefs. And perhaps even fomewhat of this might have been 
fpared. If in fome particulars I have exprefled my ftnle other wife 
than fome others before have done, Veniam dahimus pretimujque 
vieffim; and perhaps if fome of them had before contidered what 
now I write, they might have been of the fame opinion. However, 
as to the main point in queftion, the Generality of Chriftians I take 
to be concurrent with me ; and if in fome particulars we differ, they 
have my Reafons for what I fay. 

I fliall briefly fumme up the shief points in difoute between you 
and me. 

That Chrift, as God, (in union with the Father and Holy-Ghoft,) 
did create the World, I readily grant. But -ssaxfingly (in contradi- 
ftincHonto the Father and Holy-Ghoft,) nor as our Mediator and 
Redeemer, ( God and Man. ) For it is the Man Chrift Jefus, that is 
Mediator between God and Men: but he was not then Man. Nor 
was there any Occafion for a Redeemer, before the FaU of Adam: 
which was not till after the World was created. And I prefume, 
when you confider of it, you do herein agree with me, whatever 
unwary expreffions you might have let fall. 

I agree alfo thatGWcreated the World in Six days • that is, that 
in every of thofe days he created fomewhat ; as is declared mGen.x. 
But in what part of each day he did create each particular, we do 
not know ; Nor, that he did imploy the whole day therein. ( And in 
this, I think , you may agree with me alfo.) For the Creation of 
Eve was (for ought we know) Gods loft work of Creation; which 
was certainly linilhed before the End of the Sixth day. For, after 
this, Ihe was given as a Wife to Adam, with the Inftitutfon of Mar. 
riage, and the Nuptial Benediction, Be fruitful and multiply, on the 
Sixth day. 

I agree alfo, that there was, on the Firft day, 2)atinefiand Light, 
(and lb on the Second, Third, and other days, ) and that Darknefs 
was before Light. But, how long it had been dark before'God faid Let 
there be Light ( whether jufl twelve hours, neither more nor lefs ) 
we cannot tell : Much, lefs that every of thefe days did begin at 
Sun-fet ( before there wasa Sun,) or what is equivalent to it, as yen 
would have it. We have no Word for it, nor is it fo Written. Tis 
fyit your Fanjy, or f as in your own language ) nothing but dark con- 
jeffures (very dark) or at moft, feme uncertain Jewifo Traditions, 
later than our Saviour's time (fori thinkfew of the Rabbins a'refo 
eld;) And I do not know but that (fince that time) Chriftians may 
sndeiftaod the Bible as well as they. And fure we ar*j that both in 
.the Old and New Teflamenr, days are other wife reckoned; the 

R Eve- 



! jo The ChriftUn Sdbath Part II. 

Evening being accounted as belonging to the day pajl y not to the 
day to come on the morrow. 

I agree alfo that God did on the Seventh day, Reft or oeafe n 
Create ; that is, that the Seventh was the firft day ( though not dip 
fir/i Moment) in which he did mt-create. 

I agree alfo that GWdid Blefs and Santiify the Seventh day; 
that is, that he did Celebrate or Signalize (by fome Holy and Bkjfed 
At\ of Providence) this Seventh day more than the Eighth or Ninth 
or thofe that follow (though in thefc alfo he ceded from Creating : ) 
Perhaps by that Bleffed fromife of the Seed of the Woman on this 
day. But, on what part of this day he did begin thus to Blefs and 
Sanftify it, we cannot tell : Much lefs, that it was juft at Sun-fet. 
And, whatever it were, it doth not appear to have been during the 
State of Innocence (as you would have it, without alleging any 
thing to prove it) but might be ( for ought appears) after the Fait. 
Nor is it faid that Adam and Eve did blels or fandify it, or that they 
were commanded fo to do ; much lefs that they were commanded 
for ever after to fanftify every feventh day m courfe from hence, and 
no other, to the end of the Werld; as you would have it. Nor do 
there appear any footfteps in hiftory ( facred or orofane ) that any 
fuch Sabbath was obferved, or the name of Sabbath ever ufed, before 
that of Exod. 16. after IJraeh coming out of Egypt : And what- 
ever inducements we have fo to think, are but Conjectural; we have 
no Wwd for it, nor is it fo Written. 

I do agree alfo, that zfaxIfratZi coming out of Egypt, a weekly 
Sabbath was appointed, to them, on the Jeventh day in courfe from 
the firft raining of Manna: But whctheT this (from the firft raining 
of Manna) were alfo a feventh in courfe from the firft Creation; we 
cannot tell : Nor are we fure that this courfe of Sabbaths, even to 
the Jews, did continue till Chnfts time, but might (for ought we 
know) be interrupted and forgotten during the Babylonilh Cap- 
tivity, and after reftored by tiehemiah, either on the fame or fome 
other day, and fo continue till Chnfts time : Nor do you think ( as 
fometimes you tell us ) that any other nation but the Jews ( and their 
Prpfelites) "did then obferve this or ihy other Sabbath ; nor ( I think) 
earlier than the times of Chriftianky. I add, Nor doth it appear 
that any other Nation (before the tirties of Chriftianity ) didmea- 
fur^, their lime by Weeks (of fevendays) as they did by Months 
and Tears; or that even the Jews fa did before that of Exod. 16. 
Much lefs, that the names of Saturday, Sunday, Monday, &c. were 
fo much as known before that time ; or that, even then, they were 
taken up upon an Idolatrous account (as you imagine) butonely an 
Jjlrologicaf mount with refpeft to the Seven Timet s. I 



Part II. The Chrijlian Sdbath. i?i 

I agree alfo that in the Fourth Commandment on Mount Sinai a 
weekly Sabbath is appointed, on the feventh day after fx days of \ 
labour : But that this muft be ( till the worlds end ) juft on the 
feventh in courfe from the firft raining of Manna (as wasthat of the 
Jews,) or (as you would have it) theieventh in courfe/rcwi the firft 
Creation, I do not find; but think our Lords-day doth as fully an- 
fwe.r the Words and Defign of the fourth Commandment as did, 
\ then, that of the Jews : and is as much fpecificated by the praElife 
\ and appointment of Chriji and his Apofiles and the Chrijlian Church, 
• (reckoned in courfe from Chrift's Refurre&ion ) as was that by 
Mofes from the raining of Manna. ( The fourth Commandment re- 
I quires a Day ; and the Praftife of Chrift and his Apoftles, dire6U 
to Which day. ) And I think we have as clear Evidence that our 
Lords-day is that in a continual fucceflion from the Lords-day in 
the New Teftament ( on the firft day of the Jewifh Week) as you can 
\ have that our Saturday is in a continual fucceflion from the Jewifh 
I Sabbath on their feventh day; and much more than that it is fo in a 
; continued fucceffion from the firft Creation. 

And in every of the points wherein we differ, I think I have fo 
I fully anfwered all your Obje&ions and Allegations, that no indiffe- 
' rent Reader will doubt of it. 

And therefore, upon the whole matter, I fee no reafon why either 
You or We (hould negleft to Celebrate the Lords-day, or change it 
^ for your Saturday-Sabbath. 

I have forborn giving you hard words (faveas the Arguments 
may pinch hard ) unlefs perhaps in returning your own words upon 
you. Which if they were foft words as coming from you, I hope 
you will not think them hard from me. Or it even therein you 
f think I have been toofevere, I beg your Pardon. But defire you 
I withal to confider, that, when you Magifterially affirm fo many 
things of which you give fo little proof, and ly fo open and 
i obnoxious to Exceptions all along, Difficile eft Satyr am non 
fcribere. My defign in writing is to Aflert the Truth, and Pre- 
1 ferve the Teace of the Church , in a point which I think Ma- 
terial: And am forry that therein I nave Tou my Adverfary. 
For I have no ill Will to your Perfon, though I cannot approve 
your Opinion. But am 

SIR, 

Sept. g.? *Tour wry Humble Servant, 

John Wallis. 



Digitized 



search